Search results for 'Consequence' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Michael Glanzberg (2015). Logical Consequence and Natural Language. In Colin Caret & Ole Hjortland (eds.), Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford University Press 71-120.
    One of the great successes in the study of language has been the application of formal methods, including those of formal logic. Even so, this chapter argues against one way of accounting for this success, by arguing that the study of natural language semantics and of logical consequence relations are not the same. There is indeed a lot we can glean about logic from looking at our languages, and at our inferential practices, but the semantic properties of natural languages (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Colin R. Caret & Ole T. Hjortland (2015). Logical Consequence: Its Nature, Structure, and Application. In Colin R. Caret & Ole T. Hjortland (eds.), Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford University Press
    Recent work in philosophical logic has taken interesting and unexpected turns. It has seen not only a proliferation of logical systems, but new applications of a wide range of different formal theories to philosophical questions. As a result, philosophers have been forced to revisit the nature and foundation of core logical concepts, chief amongst which is the concept of logical consequence. This essay sets the contributions of the volume in context and identifies how they advance important debates within the (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Lionel Shapiro (2011). Deflating Logical Consequence. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):320-342.
    Deflationists about truth seek to undermine debates about the nature of truth by arguing that the truth predicate is merely a device that allows us to express a certain kind of generality. I argue that a parallel approach is available in the case of logical consequence. Just as deflationism about truth offers an alternative to accounts of truth's nature in terms of correspondence or justification, deflationism about consequence promises an alternative to model-theoretic or proof-theoretic accounts of consequence's (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  4. Christian List, What’s Wrong with the Consequence Argument: In Defence of Compatibilist Libertarianism.
    The most prominent argument for the incompatibility of free will and determinism is Peter van Inwagen’s consequence argument. In this paper, I offer a new diagnosis of what is wrong with this argument. Both proponents and critics of the argument typically accept the way it is framed and only disagree on whether the argument’s premises and the rules of inference on which it relies are true. I suggest that the argument involves a category mistake: it conflates two different levels (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  65
    Gerhard Schurz & Paul Weingartner (2010). Zwart and Franssen's Impossibility Theorem Holds for Possible-World-Accounts but Not for Consequence-Accounts to Verisimilitude. Synthese 172 (3):415 - 436.
    Zwart and Franssen’s impossibility theorem reveals a conflict between the possible-world-based content-definition and the possible-world-based likeness-definition of verisimilitude. In Sect. 2 we show that the possible-world-based content-definition violates four basic intuitions of Popper’s consequence-based content-account to verisimilitude, and therefore cannot be said to be in the spirit of Popper’s account, although this is the opinion of some prominent authors. In Sect. 3 we argue that in consequence-accounts , content-aspects and likeness-aspects of verisimilitude are not in conflict with each (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  6.  22
    Elia Zardini (2014). Context and Consequence. An Intercontextual Substructural Logic. Synthese 191 (15):3473-3500.
    Some apparently valid arguments crucially rely on context change. To take a kind of example first discussed by Frege, ‘Tomorrow, it’ll be sunny’ taken on a day seems to entail ‘Today, it’s sunny’ taken on the next day, but the first sentence taken on a day sadly does not seem to entail the second sentence taken on the second next day. Mid-argument context change has not been accounted for by the tradition that has extensively studied the distinctive logical properties of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  7. Julien Murzi & Massimiliano Carrara (2014). More Reflections on Consequence. Logique Et Analyse 227:223-258.
    This special issue collects together nine new essays on logical consequence :the relation obtaining between the premises and the conclusion of a logically valid argument. The present paper is a partial, and opinionated,introduction to the contemporary debate on the topic. We focus on two influential accounts of consequence, the model-theoretic and the proof-theoretic, and on the seeming platitude that valid arguments necessarilypreserve truth. We briefly discuss the main objections these accounts face, as well as Hartry Field’s contention that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  45
    Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert Rooij (2012). Tolerance and Mixed Consequence in the S'valuationist Setting. Studia Logica 100 (4):855-877.
    In a previous paper (see ‘Tolerant, Classical, Strict’, henceforth TCS) we investigated a semantic framework to deal with the idea that vague predicates are tolerant, namely that small changes do not affect the applicability of a vague predicate even if large changes do. Our approach there rests on two main ideas. First, given a classical extension of a predicate, we can define a strict and a tolerant extension depending on an indifference relation associated to that predicate. Second, we can use (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  9.  34
    Nikolaos Galatos & Constantine Tsinakis (2009). Equivalence of Consequence Relations: An Order-Theoretic and Categorical Perspective. Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (3):780-810.
    Equivalences and translations between consequence relations abound in logic. The notion of equivalence can be defined syntactically, in terms of translations of formulas, and order-theoretically, in terms of the associated lattices of theories. W. Blok and D. Pigozzi proved in [4] that the two definitions coincide in the case of an algebraizable sentential deductive system. A refined treatment of this equivalence was provided by W. Blok and B. Jónsson in [3]. Other authors have extended this result to the cases (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  10. John Corcoran & José Miguel Sagüillo (2011). The Absence of Multiple Universes of Discourse in the 1936 Tarski Consequence-Definition Paper. History and Philosophy of Logic 32 (4):359 - 374.
    This paper discusses the history of the confusion and controversies over whether the definition of consequence presented in the 11-page 1936 Tarski consequence-definition paper is based on a monistic fixed-universe framework?like Begriffsschrift and Principia Mathematica. Monistic fixed-universe frameworks, common in pre-WWII logic, keep the range of the individual variables fixed as the class of all individuals. The contrary alternative is that the definition is predicated on a pluralistic multiple-universe framework?like the 1931 Gödel incompleteness paper. A pluralistic multiple-universe framework (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  11.  99
    John Martin Fischer & Garrett Pendergraft (2013). Does the Consequence Argument Beg the Question? Philosophical Studies 166 (3):575-595.
    The Consequence Argument has elicited various responses, ranging from acceptance as obviously right to rejection as obviously problematic in one way or another. Here we wish to focus on one specific response, according to which the Consequence Argument begs the question. This is a serious accusation that has not yet been adequately rebutted, and we aim to remedy that in what follows. We begin by giving a formulation of the Consequence Argument. We also offer some tentative proposals (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  12. Eddy Nahmias, The State of the Free Will Debate: From Frankfurt Cases to the Consequence Argument.
    In this paper I tie together the reasoning used in the Consequence Argument with the intuitions that drive Frankfurt cases in a way that illuminates some of the underlying differences between compatibilists and incompatibilists. I begin by explaining the ‘basic mechanism’ at work in Frankfurt cases: the existence of sufficient conditions for an outcome that do not actually bring about that outcome. I suggest that other potential threats to free will, such as God’s foreknowledge, can be understood in terms (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Alicia Finch (2013). On Behalf of the Consequence Argument: Time, Modality, and the Nature of Free Action. Philosophical Studies 163 (1):151-170.
    The consequence argument for the incompatibility of free action and determinism has long been under attack, but two important objections have only recently emerged: Warfield’s modal fallacy objection and Campbell’s no past objection. In this paper, I explain the significance of these objections and defend the consequence argument against them. First, I present a novel formulation of the argument that withstands their force. Next, I argue for the one controversial claim on which this formulation relies: the trans-temporality thesis. (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  14.  20
    Thomas N. P. A. Brouwer (2015). Prospects for a Cognitive Norm Account of Logical Consequence. In Pavel Arazim & Michal Danzak (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2014. College Publications 1-19.
    When some P implies some Q, this should have some impact on what attitudes we take to P and Q. In other words: logical consequence has a normative import. I use this idea, recently explored by a number of scholars, as a stepping stone to a bolder view: that relations of logical consequence can be identified with norms on our propositional attitudes, or at least that our talk of logical consequence can be explained in terms of such (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  13
    Rosalie Iemhoff (2016). Consequence Relations and Admissible Rules. Journal of Philosophical Logic 45 (3):327-348.
    This paper contains a detailed account of the notion of admissibility in the setting of consequence relations. It is proved that the two notions of admissibility used in the literature coincide, and it provides an extension to multi–conclusion consequence relations that is more general than the one usually encountered in the literature on admissibility. The notion of a rule scheme is introduced to capture rules with side conditions, and it is shown that what is generally understood under the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16.  52
    Yishai Cohen (2015). Molinists Cannot Endorse the Consequence Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 77 (3):231-246.
    Perszyk has argued that Molinists cannot consistently endorse the consequence argument because of a structurally similar argument for the incompatibility of true Molinist counterfactuals of freedom and the ability to do otherwise. Wierenga has argued that on the proper understanding of CCFs, there is a relevant difference between the consequence argument and the anti-Molinist argument. I argue that, even on Wierenga’s understanding of CCFs, there is in fact no relevant difference between the two arguments. Moreover, I strengthen Perszyk’s (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  17. Max Weiss (2014). A Closer Look at Manifest Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):471-498.
    Fine (2007) argues that Frege’s puzzle and its relatives demonstrate a need for a basic reorientation of the field of semantics. According to this reorientation, the domain of semantic facts would be closed not under the classical consequence relation but only under a stronger relation Fine calls “manifest consequence.” I examine Fine’s informally sketched analyses of manifest consequence, showing that each can be amended to determine a class of strong consequence relations. A best candidate relation emerges (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18.  78
    Gil Sagi (2014). Models and Logical Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (5):943-964.
    This paper deals with the adequacy of the model-theoretic definition of logical consequence. Logical consequence is commonly described as a necessary relation that can be determined by the form of the sentences involved. In this paper, necessity is assumed to be a metaphysical notion, and formality is viewed as a means to avoid dealing with complex metaphysical questions in logical investigations. Logical terms are an essential part of the form of sentences and thus have a crucial role in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19.  51
    Michael De (2012). Can Logical Consequence Be Deflated? In Insolubles and Consequences : essays in honour of Stephen Read. 23-33.
    An interesting question is whether deflationism about truth (and falsity) extends to related properties and relations on truthbearers. Lionel Shapiro (2011) answers affirmatively by arguing that a certain deflationism about truth is as plausible as an analogous version of deflationism about logical consequence. I argue that the argument fails on two counts. First, it trivializes to any relation between truthbearers, including substantive ones; in other words, his argument can be used to establish that deflationism about truth is as plausible (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20.  43
    Denis Bonnay & Dag Westerståhl (2012). Consequence Mining: Constans Versus Consequence Relations. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (4):671-709.
    The standard semantic definition of consequence with respect to a selected set X of symbols, in terms of truth preservation under replacement (Bolzano) or reinterpretation (Tarski) of symbols outside X, yields a function mapping X to a consequence relation ⇒x. We investigate a function going in the other direction, thus extracting the constants of a given consequence relation, and we show that this function (a) retrieves the usual logical constants from the usual logical consequence relations, and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  21.  52
    John Corcoran (2014). “Truth-Preserving and Consequence-Preserving Deduction Rules”,. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 20:130-1.
    A truth-preservation fallacy is using the concept of truth-preservation where some other concept is needed. For example, in certain contexts saying that consequences can be deduced from premises using truth-preserving deduction rules is a fallacy if it suggests that all truth-preserving rules are consequence-preserving. The arithmetic additive-associativity rule that yields 6 = (3 + (2 + 1)) from 6 = ((3 + 2) + 1) is truth-preserving but not consequence-preserving. As noted in James Gasser’s dissertation, Leibniz has been (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  38
    Philip Kremer & Michael Kremer (2003). Some Supervaluation-Based Consequence Relations. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (3):225-244.
    In this paper, we define some consequence relations based on supervaluation semantics for partial models, and we investigate their properties. For our main consequence relation, we show that natural versions of the following fail: upwards and downwards Lowenheim-Skolem, axiomatizability, and compactness. We also consider an alternate version for supervaluation semantics, and show both axiomatizability and compactness for the resulting consequence relation.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  23.  49
    Wai-Hung Wong & Zanja Yudell (2013). How Fallacious is the Consequence Fallacy? Philosophical Studies 165 (1):221-227.
    Timothy Williamson argues against the tactic of criticizing confidence in a theory by identifying a logical consequence of the theory whose probability is not raised by the evidence. He dubs it “the consequence fallacy”. In this paper, we will show that Williamson’s formulation of the tactic in question is ambiguous. On one reading of Williamson’s formulation, the tactic is indeed a fallacy, but it is not a commonly used tactic; on another reading, it is a commonly used tactic (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  67
    Fred Johnson & Peter Woodruff (2002). Categorical Consequence for Paraconsistent Logic. In Walter Carnielli (ed.), Paraconsistency:the logical way to the inconsistent. 141-150.
    Consequence rleations over sets of "judgments" are defined by using "overdetermined" as well as "underdetermined" valuations. Some of these relations are shown to be categorical. And generalized soundness and completeness results are given for both multiple and single conclusion consequence relations.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  77
    Marcus Rossberg & Daniel Cohnitz (2009). Logical Consequence for Nominalists. Theoria. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science 24 (2):147-168.
    It is often claimed that nominalistic programmes to reconstruct mathematics fail, since they will at some point involve the notion of logical consequence which is unavailable to the nominalist. In this paper we use an idea of Goodman and Quine to develop a nominalistically acceptable explication of logical consequence.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26.  63
    Göran Sundholm (2012). “Inference Versus Consequence” Revisited: Inference, Consequence, Conditional, Implication. Synthese 187 (3):943-956.
    Inference versus consequence , an invited lecture at the LOGICA 1997 conference at Castle Liblice, was part of a series of articles for which I did research during a Stockholm sabbatical in the autumn of 1995. The article seems to have been fairly effective in getting its point across and addresses a topic highly germane to the Uppsala workshop. Owing to its appearance in the LOGICA Yearbook 1997 , Filosofia Publishers, Prague, 1998, it has been rather inaccessible. Accordingly it (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  27.  61
    Dag Westerståhl (2012). From Constants to Consequence, and Back. Synthese 187 (3):957-971.
    Bolzano’s definition of consequence in effect associates with each set X of symbols (in a given interpreted language) a consequence relation X . We present this in a precise and abstract form, in particular studying minimal sets of symbols generating X . Then we present a method for going in the other direction: extracting from an arbitrary consequence relation its associated set C of constants. We show that this returns the expected logical constants from familiar consequence (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28.  6
    Wojciech Dzik & Piotr Wojtylak (2016). Modal Consequence Relations Extending $Mathbf{S4.3}$: An Application of Projective Unification. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 57 (4):523-549.
    We characterize all finitary consequence relations over $\mathbf{S4.3}$, both syntactically, by exhibiting so-called passive rules that extend the given logic, and semantically, by providing suitable strongly adequate classes of algebras. This is achieved by applying an earlier result stating that a modal logic $L$ extending $\mathbf{S4}$ has projective unification if and only if $L$ contains $\mathbf{S4.3}$. In particular, we show that these consequence relations enjoy the strong finite model property, and are finitely based. In this way, we extend (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  8
    Pascale Hugon (2013). Phya Pa Chos Kyi Seng Ge on Argumentation by Consequence (Thal ʼgyur): The Nature, Function, and Form of Consequence Statements. Journal of Indian Philosophy 41 (6):671-702.
    This paper presents the main aspects of the views of the Tibetan logician Phya pa Chos kyi seng ge (1109–1169) on argumentation “by consequence” (thal ʼgyur, Skt. prasaṅga) based on his exposition of the topic in the fifth chapter of his Tshad ma yid kyi mun sel and on a parallel excursus in his commentary on Dharmakīrti’s Pramānaviniścaya. It aims at circumscribing primarily the nature and function of consequences (thal ʼgyur/thal ba) for this author—in particular the distinction between “proving (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  30. José L. Zalabardo (2010). The Tractatus on Logical Consequence. European Journal of Philosophy 18 (3):425-442.
    I discuss the account of logical consequence advanced in Wittgenstein's Tractatus. I argue that the role that elementary propositions are meant to play in this account can be used to explain two remarkable features that Wittgenstein ascribes to them: that they are logically independent from one another and that their components refer to simple objects. I end with a proposal as to how to understand Wittgenstein's claim that all propositions can be analysed as truth functions of elementary propositions.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31. Phil Corkum, Aristotle on Logical Consequence.
    Compare two conceptions of validity: under an example of a modal conception, an argument is valid just in case it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false; under an example of a topic-neutral conception, an argument is valid just in case there are no arguments of the same logical form with true premises and a false conclusion. This taxonomy of positions suggests a project in the philosophy of logic: the reductive analysis of the modal conception (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  45
    Mario Gómez-Torrente (2000). A Note on Formality and Logical Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (5):529-539.
    Logic is formal in the sense that all arguments of the same form as logically valid arguments are also logically valid and hence truth-preserving. However, it is not known whether all arguments that are valid in the usual model-theoretic sense are truthpreserving. Tarski claimed that it could be proved that all arguments that are valid (in the sense of validity he contemplated in his 1936 paper on logical consequence) are truthpreserving. But he did not offer the proof. The question (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  33.  87
    Moritz Schulz (2010). Epistemic Modals and Informational Consequence. Synthese 174 (3):385 - 395.
    Recently, Yalcin (Epistemic modals. Mind, 116 , 983–1026, 2007) put forward a novel account of epistemic modals. It is based on the observation that sentences of the form ‘ & Might ’ do not embed under ‘suppose’ and ‘if’. Yalcin concludes that such sentences must be contradictory and develops a notion of informational consequence which validates this idea. I will show that informational consequence is inadequate as an account of the logic of epistemic modals: it cannot deal with (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  34.  51
    Charles Hermes, Truthmakers and the Consequence Argument.
    Recent work in the truthmakers literature demonstrates that the logic of truthmaking is distinct from classical logic. Since free will is an ontological issue, and not merely a semantic issue, arguments about free will ought to be sensitive to these developments. In Truthmakers and the Direct Argument, Hermes argues that one of the main arguments for incompatibiilsm fails precisely where the truthmakers literature would predict. Here, I argue that similar problems make the Consequence Argument untenable.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Alex Blum (2003). The Core of the Consequence Argument. Dialectica 57 (4):423-429.
    We suggest that the classical version of the consequence argument contending that freedom and determinism are incompatible subtly misstates the core intuition, which is that if a true conditional and a true antecedent are jointly beyond our control, then so is the consequent. We show however that the improved version no less than the classical implies fatalism.Interestingly, the reasoning, that yields fatalism, undermines a direct argument for the soundness of the improved version. But if fatalism is sound, then trivially, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36.  40
    George Weaver & John Corcoran (1974). Logical Consequence in Modal Logic. II. Some Semantic Systems for ${\Rm S}4$. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 15 (3):370-378.
    ABSTRACT: This 1974 paper builds on our 1969 paper (Corcoran-Weaver [2]). Here we present three (modal, sentential) logics which may be thought of as partial systematizations of the semantic and deductive properties of a sentence operator which expresses certain kinds of necessity. The logical truths [sc. tautologies] of these three logics coincide with one another and with those of standard formalizations of Lewis's S5. These logics, when regarded as logistic systems (cf. Corcoran [1], p. 154), are seen to be equivalent; (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  37. Peter Pagin (2012). Assertion, Inference, and Consequence. Synthese 187 (3):869 - 885.
    In this paper the informativeness account of assertion (Pagin in Assertion. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011) is extended to account for inference. I characterize the conclusion of an inference as asserted conditionally on the assertion of the premises. This gives a notion of conditional assertion (distinct from the standard notion related to the affirmation of conditionals). Validity and logical validity of an inference is characterized in terms of the application of method that preserves informativeness, and contrasted with consequence and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  87
    Jared Bates (1999). Etchemendy, Tarski, and Logical Consequence. Southwest Philosophy Review 15 (1):47-54.
    John Etchemendy (1990) has argued that Tarski's definition of logical consequence fails as an adequate philosophical analysis. Since then, Greg Ray (1996) has defended Tarski's analysis against Etchemendy's criticisms. Here, I'll argue that--even given Ray's defense of Tarski's definition--we may nevertheless lay claim to the conditional conclusion that 'if' Tarski intended a conceptual analysis of logical consequence, 'then' it fails as such. Secondly, I'll give some reasons to think that Tarski 'did' intend a conceptual analysis of logical (...). (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  45
    Owen Griffiths (2014). Formal and Informal Consequence. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 3 (1):9-20.
    The now standard definition of logical consequence is model-theoretic. Many writers have tried to justify, or to criticise, the model-theoretic definition by arguing that it extensionally captures, or fails to capture, our intuitions about logical consequence, such as its modal character or its being truth-preservation in virtue of form. One popular means of comparing the extension of model-theoretic consequence with some intuitive notion proceeds by adapting Kreisel's squeezing argument. But these attempts get Kreisel wrong, and try to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  79
    Leigh C. Vicens (2012). Divine Determinism, Human Freedom, and the Consequence Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 71 (2):145-155.
    In this paper I consider the view, held by some Thomistic thinkers, that divine determinism is compatible with human freedom, even though natural determinism is not. After examining the purported differences between divine and natural determinism, I discuss the Consequence Argument, which has been put forward to establish the incompatibility of natural determinism and human freedom. The Consequence Argument, I note, hinges on the premise that an action ultimately determined by factors outside of the actor’s control is not (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  64
    William H. Hanson (1999). Ray on Tarski on Logical Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (6):605-616.
    In "Logical consequence: A defense of Tarski" (Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 25, 1996, pp. 617-677), Greg Ray defends Tarski's account of logical consequence against the criticisms of John Etchemendy. While Ray's defense of Tarski is largely successful, his attempt to give a general proof that Tarskian consequence preserves truth fails. Analysis of this failure shows that de facto truth preservation is a very weak criterion of adequacy for a theory of logical consequence and should be (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  5
    Christopher Hughes (2015). The Consequence Argument and the Definition of Determinism. Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 71 (4):705-724.
    Resumo Peter van Inwagen no seu An Essay of Free Will e, no muito mais tarde, “The Consequence Argument” formula várias versões daquilo que designou por “o argumento de consequência”. van Inwagen descreveu o “argumento da consequência” como um argumento para a incompatibilidade do determinismo com o livre arbítrio. Contudo, o autor deste artigo argumenta que a mais recente formulação do argumento da consequência não é, tal como está, um argumento para a incompatibilidade do determinismo com o livre arbítrio. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  26
    Jim Edwards (2003). Reduction and Tarski's Definition of Logical Consequence. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 44 (1):49-62.
    In his classic 1936 paper Tarski sought to motivate his definition of logical consequence by appeal to the inference form: P(0), P(1), . . ., P(n), . . . therefore ∀nP(n). This is prima facie puzzling because these inferences are seemingly first-order and Tarski knew that Gödel had shown first-order proof methods to be complete, and because ∀nP(n) is not a logical consequence of P(0), P(1), . . ., P(n), . . . by Taski's proposed definition. An attempt (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44.  38
    Owen Griffiths (2012). Reinflating Logical Consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic (1):1-9.
    Shapiro (Philos Q 61:320–342, 2011) argues that, if we are deflationists about truth, we should be deflationists about logical consequence. Like the truth predicate, he claims, the logical consequence predicate is merely a device of generalisation and more substantial characterisation, e.g. proof- or model-theoretic, is mistaken. I reject his analogy between truth and logical consequence and argue that, by appreciating how the logical consequence predicate is used as well as the goals of proof theory and model (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  4
    Heinrich Wansing (1995). Tarskian Structured Consequence Relations and Functional Completeness. Mathematical Logic Quarterly 41 (1):73-92.
    In this paper functional completeness results are obtained for certain positive and constructive propositional logics associated with a Tarski-type structured consequence relation as defined by Gabbay.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  46.  40
    Danilo Šuster (2012). Lehrer and the Consequence Argument. Philosophical Studies 161 (1):77-86.
    The consequence argument of van Inwagen is widely regarded as the best argument for incompatibilism. Lewis’s response is praised by van Inwagen as the best compatibilist’s strategy but Lewis himself acknowledges that his strategy resembles that of Lehrer. A comparison will show that one can speak about Lehrer-Lewis strategy, although I think that Lewis’s variation is dialectically slightly stronger. The paper provides a response to some standard objections of incompatibilists to the Lehrer-Lewis reply.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  27
    Christian Wallmann (2013). A Shared Framework for Consequence Operations and Abstract Model Theory. Logica Universalis 7 (2):125-145.
    In this paper we develop an abstract theory of adequacy. In the same way as the theory of consequence operations is a general theory of logic, this theory of adequacy is a general theory of the interactions and connections between consequence operations and its sound and complete semantics. Addition of axioms for the connectives of propositional logic to the basic axioms of consequence operations yields a unifying framework for different systems of classical propositional logic. We present an (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  29
    Danilo Suster (2012). Informal Logic and Informal Consequence. In Trobok Majda, Miscevic Nenad & Zarnic Berislav (eds.), Between logic and reality : modeling inference, action and understanding, (Logic, epistemology, and the unity of science, vol. 25). Springer 101--120.
    What is informal logic, is it ``logic" at all? Main contemporary approaches are briefly presented and critically commented. If the notion of consequence is at the heart of logic, does it make sense to speak about ``informal" consequence? A valid inference is truth preserving, if the premises are true, so is the conclusion. According to Prawitz two further conditions must also be satisfied in the case of classical logical consequence: (i) it is because of the logical form (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  38
    Samir Chopra & Eric Martin (2002). Generalized Logical Consequence: Making Room for Induction in the Logic of Science. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (3):245-280.
    We present a framework that provides a logic for science by generalizing the notion of logical (Tarskian) consequence. This framework will introduce hierarchies of logical consequences, the first level of each of which is identified with deduction. We argue for identification of the second level of the hierarchies with inductive inference. The notion of induction presented here has some resonance with Popper's notion of scientific discovery by refutation. Our framework rests on the assumption of a restricted class of structures (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  10
    Szymon Frankowski (2011). Syntactic Properties of P-Consequence. Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (4):285-295.
    p-consequence is intended as a formalization of non-deductive reasoning. So far semantical or general properties have been presented more thoroughly ([2]–[5]). In the present paper we would like to focus on its syntactic properties.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000