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

585 found
Sort by:
  1. David Sherry (2006). Formal Logic for Informal Logicians. Informal Logic 26 (2):199-220.score: 18.0
    Classical logic yields counterintuitive results for numerous propositional argument forms. The usual alternatives (modal logic, relevance logic, etc.) generate counterintuitive results of their own. The counterintuitive results create problems—especially pedagogical problems—for informal logicians who wish to use formal logic to analyze ordinary argumentation. This paper presents a system, PL– (propositional logic minus the funny business), based on the idea that paradigmatic valid argument forms arise from justificatory or explanatory discourse. PL– avoids the pedagogical difficulties without sacrificing insight into argument.
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. E. Jennifer Ashworth (2007). Metaphor and the Logicians From Aristotle to Cajetan. Vivarium 45 (s 2-3):311-327.score: 18.0
    I examine the treatment of metaphor by medieval logicians and how it stemmed from their reception of classical texts in logic, grammar, and rhetoric. I consider the relation of the word 'metaphor' to the notions of translatio and transumptio, and show that it is not always synonymous with these. I also show that in the context of commentaries on the Sophistical Refutations metaphor was subsumed under equivocation. In turn, it was linked with the notion of analogy not so much (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Diego E. Machuca (2008). Review of Richard Bett (Trans.), Sextus Empiricus: Against the Logicians. [REVIEW] Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2008.score: 18.0
    This translation of the two books that make up Against the Logicians is a valuable addition to the ever increasing literature on Pyrrhonism. The only previous complete English version of these two books is that of R. G. Bury, which appeared in 1935 in the Loeb Classical Library as the second volume of..
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Don S. Levi (2010). Against the Logicians. The Philosophers' Magazine 51 (51):80-86.score: 18.0
    Logic as a subject has existed for a long time. Aristotle and the Stoics identified some of its principles, as did Indian logicians. And this ancient logic underwent an extraordinary mathematical development in the last hundred and fifty years. So logic certainly exists, at least as a branch of mathematics. The question is whether it is anything more than that.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. R. K. Payne (1987). The Theory of Meaning in Buddhist Logicians: The Historical and Intellectual Context of Apoha. [REVIEW] Journal of Indian Philosophy 15 (3):261-284.score: 18.0
    These supporting concepts enable us to much more adequately understand the meaning of apoha. First, a sharp distinction is drawn between the real and the conceptual; the real is particular, unique, momentary and the basis of perception, while the conceptual is universal, general, only supposedly objective and the basis of language. Second, the complex nature of negation discloses the kind of negation meant by apoha. Negation by implication is seen as disclosing the necessary relation between simple affirmations and simple negations. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Sandra Lapointe (2012). Is Logic Formal? Bolzano, Kant and the Kantian Logicians. Grazer Philosophische Studien 85 (1):11-32.score: 18.0
    In the wake of Kant, logicians seemed to have adhered to the idea that what is distinctive of logic is its “formality”. In the paper, I discuss the distinction Kant draws between formality and generality of logic and argue that he ultimately conflates the two notions. I argue further that Kant's views on the formality of logic rest on a series of non trivial assumptions concerning the nature of cognition. I document the way in which these assumptions were received (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Khaled El-Rouayheb (2012). Post-Avicennan Logicians on the Subject Matter of Logic: Some Thirteenth- and Fourteenth-Century Discussions. Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 22 (1):69-90.score: 16.0
    In the thirteenth century, the influential logician Afn al-Kh (d. 1248) departed from the Avicennan view that the subject matter of logic is . For al-Kh, the subject matter of logic is . His departure elicited intense and sometimes abstruse discussions in the course of subsequent centuries. Prominent supporters of Kh's view on the subject matter of logic included K (d. 1277), Ibn Wil (d. 1298) and Taftn (d. 1274), Samarqandb al-Dzī (d. 1365). This article presents the outline of the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Josh Parsons (2003). A–Theory for Tense Logicians. Analysis 63 (277):4–6.score: 15.0
    Let us call “tense logic” the programme of explaining tense in natural languages by means of a model theory similar in structure to possible worlds semantics for modality. This programme would make the following claims.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Norman Kretzmann (1970). Medieval Logicians on the Meaning of the Propositio. Journal of Philosophy 67 (20):767-787.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Michael Detlefsen (1992). Poincaré Against the Logicians. Synthese 90 (3):349 - 378.score: 15.0
    Poincaré was a persistent critic of logicism. Unlike most critics of logicism, however, he did not focus his attention on the basic laws of the logicists or the question of their genuinely logical status. Instead, he directed his remarks against the place accorded to logical inference in the logicist's conception of mathematical proof. Following Leibniz, traditional logicist dogma (and this is explicit in Frege) has held that reasoning or inference is everywhere the same — that there are no principles of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Paul Vincent Spade, Why Don't Mediaeval Logicians Ever Tell Us What They're Doing? Or, What is This, a Conspiracy?score: 15.0
    What I want to talk about here is a puzzle for historians of philosophy who, like me, have spent a fair amount of time studying the history of mediaeval logic and semantic theory. I don’t know how to solve it, but in various forms it has come up repeatedly in my own work and in the work of colleagues I have talked with about it. I would like to share it with you now.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. E. J. Ashworth (1982). The Structure of Mental Language: Some Problems Discussed by Early Sixteenth Century Logicians. Vivarium 20 (1):59-83.score: 15.0
  13. Harald Thorsrud (2007). Review of Sextus Empiricus, Richard Bett (Ed., Tr.), Sextus Empiricus: Against the Logicians. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2007 (1).score: 15.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Roy Sorensen (2014). Fugu for Logicians. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (3).score: 15.0
    What do you get when you cross a fallacy with a good argument? A fugu, that is, a valid argument that tempts you to reach its conclusion invalidly (named after the dangerous but delicious Japanese puffer fish). You have yielded to the temptation more than you realize. If you are a teacher, you may have served many fugus. They arise systematically through several mechanisms. Fugus are interesting intermediate cases that shed light on the following issues: bare evidentialism, false pleasure, philosophy (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Guido Fioretti (2001). Von Kries and the Other ‘German Logicians’: Non-Numerical Probabilities Before Keynes. Economics and Philosophy 17 (2):245-273.score: 15.0
    Keynes's A Treatise on Probability (Keynes, 1921) contains some quite unusual concepts, such as non-numerical probabilities and the ‘weights of the arguments’ that support probability judgements. Their controversial interpretation gave rise to a huge literature about ‘what Keynes really did mean’, also because Keynes's later views in macroeconomics ultimately rest on his ideas on uncertainty and expectations formation.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Lawrence Powers (1967). Some Deontic Logicians. Noûs 1 (4):381-400.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Mangala Chinchore (1987). Some Thoughts on Significant Contributions of Buddhist Logicians. Journal of Indian Philosophy 15 (2):155-171.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. A. N. Prior (1956). Logicians at Play; or Syll, Simp and Hilbert. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 34 (3):182 – 192.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Solomon Feferman, John Dawson, Warren Goldfarb & Robert Solovay (1995). Gödel Turned Out to Be an Unadulterated Platonist, and Apparently Believed That an Eternal “Not” Was Laid Up in Heaven, Where Virtuous Logicians Might Hope to Meet It Hereafter. On This Gödel Commented: Concerning My “Unadulterated” Platonism, It is No More Unadulter. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 1 (1).score: 15.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Charles A. Mercier (1914). Dr. Mercier and the Logicians. Mind 23 (1):564-567.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. John Trentman (1966). Leśniewski's Ontology and Some Medieval Logicians. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 7 (4):361-364.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. David C. Makinson, Friendliness for Logicians.score: 15.0
    We define and examine a notion of logical friendliness, which is a broadening of the familiar notion of classical consequence. The concept is studied first in its simplest form, and then in a syntax-independent version, which we call sympathy. We also draw attention to the surprising number of familiar notions and operations with which it makes contact, providing a new light in which they may be seen.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Bruce McComiskey (1997). Gorgias, "On Non-Existence": Sextus Empiricus, "Against the Logicians" 1.65-87, Translated From the Greek Text in Hermann Diels's "Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker". [REVIEW] Philosophy and Rhetoric 30 (1):45 - 49.score: 15.0
  24. Larry W. Miller (1972). Gentzen's Cut Elimination Theorem for Non-Logicians. Tulane Studies in Philosophy 21:115-126.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Ignacio Angelelli (1983). Three Logicians. Review of Metaphysics 36 (4):926-929.score: 15.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Arthur F. Bentley (1946). Logicians' Underlying Postulations. Philosophy of Science 13 (1):3-19.score: 15.0
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Edward A. Maziarz (1988). Logical Praxis and Logical Theory Part II: Selected Roles for Logicians. Philosophia Mathematica (2):21-58.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Desmond Henry (1969). Le'sniewski's Ontology and Some Medieval Logicians. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 10 (3):324-326.score: 15.0
  29. Helmolt Vittinghoff (2001). Chapter 7: Dialecticians/Logicians (Mingjia) and Their Teachings. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 28 (1&2):165–172.score: 15.0
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Elizabeth Karger (1997). Some 15th and Early 16th Century Logicians on the Quantification of Categorical Sentences. Topoi 16 (1):65-76.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Peter Loptson (1984). Logical Negation George Englebretsen Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum; Atlantic Highlands, NY: Humanities Press, 1981. Pp. 62. $5.75Three Logicians: Aristotle, Leibniz, and Sommers and the Syllogistic George Englebretsen Assen, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum; Atlantic Highlands, NY: Humanities Press, 1981. Pp. Ix, 118. $9.50. [REVIEW] Dialogue 23 (04):716-721.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Alan Reeves (1977). Logicians, Language, and George Lakoff. Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (2):221 - 231.score: 15.0
  33. E. J. Ashworth (1981). Mental Language and the Unity of Propositions: A Semantic Problem Discussed by Early Sixteenth Century Logicians. Franciscan Studies 41 (1):61-96.score: 15.0
  34. Walter Carnielli & Marcelo E. Coniglio (2013). On Discourses Addressed by Infidel Logicians. In Francesco Berto, Edwin Mares, Koji Tanaka & Francesco Paoli (eds.), Paraconsistency: Logic and Applications. Springer. 27--41.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Charles E. Butterworth (2000). Against the Greek Logicians (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 38 (2):273-275.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Edward A. Maziarz (1987). Logical Praxis and Logical Theory: Selected Roles of Logicians. Philosophia Mathematica (1):48-76.score: 15.0
    But how is is that thought (viz., sense, imagination, and thought proper) is sometimes followed by action, sometimes not; sometimes by movement, sometimes not? What happens seems parallel to the case of thinking and inferring about the immovable objects of science. There the end is the truth seen (for, when one conceives the two premises, one at once conceives and comprehends the conclusion), but here the two premises result in a conclusion which is an action…Now that the action is the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Dennis A. Rohatyn (1974). Against the Logicians: Some Informed Polemics. Dialectica 28 (1‐2):87-102.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. M. A. (1914). Dr. Mercier and the Logicians. Mind 23 (92):564-567.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Benjamin S. Hawkins (1978). On Certain Incapacities Claimed for Logicians. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 19 (3):416-418.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Richard Blute & Philip Scott (2004). Category Theory for Linear Logicians. In Thomas Ehrhard (ed.), Linear Logic in Computer Science. Cambridge University Press. 316--3.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. H. T. Costello (1918). Hypotheses and Instrumental Logicians. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 15 (3):57-64.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Ivor Grattan-Guinness (2011). The Reception of Godel's 1931 Incompletability Theorems by Mathematicians, and Some Logicians, to the Early 1960s. In Matthias Baaz (ed.), Kurt Gödel and the Foundations of Mathematics: Horizons of Truth. Cambridge University Press. 57.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Intensional Logic (1998). 1.1. The Logistic Method. Church's Writings on Philosophical Matters Ex-Hibit an Unwavering Commitment to What He Called the “Logistic Method”. 3 The Term Did Not Catch on and Now One Would Just Speak of “Formalization”. The Use of These Ideas is Now so Common and Familiar Among Logicians. [REVIEW] Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 4 (2).score: 15.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Joel E. Mann (2010). Richard Bett, Ed. And Trans. Sextus Empiricus: Against the Logicians Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 27 (2):91-93.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. William J. Rapaport (1988). Review: Raymond M. Smullyan, Logicians Who Reason About Themselves. [REVIEW] Journal of Symbolic Logic 53 (2):668-669.score: 15.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. H. S. Shelton (1914). Dr. Mercier and the Logicians. Mind 23 (91):402-404.score: 15.0
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. H. Stonert (1955). Report on the First Conference of Logicians. Studia Logica 2 (1):266-266.score: 15.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. James E. Tomberlin (1974). Logicians and Agnostics: A Reply. [REVIEW] Sophia 13 (1):36-38.score: 15.0
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Sextus Empiricus (1997). Against the Logicians. Harvard University Press.score: 15.0
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. George Englebretsen (1981). Three Logicians: Aristotle, Leibniz, and Sommers and the Syllogistic. Van Gorcum.score: 15.0
1 — 50 / 585