Search results for 'logical validity' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  39
    Roy T. Cook (2014). There is No Paradox of Logical Validity. Logica Universalis 8 (3-4):447-467.
    A number of authors have argued that Peano Arithmetic supplemented with a logical validity predicate is inconsistent in much the same manner as is PA supplemented with an unrestricted truth predicate. In this paper I show that, on the contrary, there is no genuine paradox of logical validity—a completely general logical validity predicate can be coherently added to PA, and the resulting system is consistent. In addition, this observation lead to a number of novel, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  2.  9
    I. L. Janis & F. Frick (1943). The Relationship Between Attitudes Toward Conclusions and Errors in Judging Logical Validity of Syllogisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology 33 (1):73.
  3. Hartry Field (2015). What Is Logical Validity? In Colin R. Caret & Ole T. Hjortland (eds.), Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford University Press
    What are people who disagree about logic disagreeing about? The paper argues that (in a wide range of cases) they are primarily disagreeing about how to regulate their degrees of belief. An analogy is drawn between beliefs about validity and beliefs about chance: both sorts of belief serve primarily to regulate degrees of belief about other matters, but in both cases the concepts have a kind of objectivity nonetheless.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4.  10
    P. D. Welch (2011). Truth, Logical Validity and Determinateness: A Commentary on Field's Saving Truth From Paradox. Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):348-359.
    We consider notions of truth and logical validity defined in various recent constructions of Hartry Field. We try to explicate his notion of determinate truth by clarifying the path-dependent hierarchies of his determinateness operator.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  5. Elton Mayo (1915). The Limits of Logical Validity. Mind 24 (93):70-74.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  19
    John L. Pollock (1967). Logical Validity in Modal Logic. The Monist 51 (1):128-135.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  8
    Stephan Körner (1979). On Logical Validity and Informal Appropriateness. Philosophy 54 (209):377 - 379.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  8.  3
    Bo Mou (forthcoming). How the Validity of the Parallel Inference is Possible: From the Ancient Mohist Diagnose to a Modern Logical Treatment of Its Semantic-Syntactic Structure. History and Philosophy of Logic:1-24.
    The purpose of this paper is to explore the issue of how the validity of the parallel inference is possible in view of its deep semantic-syntactic structure. I first present a philosophical interpretation of the ancient Mohist treatment of the parallel inference concerning its semantic-syntactic structure. Then, to formally and accurately capture the later Mohist point in this connection for the sake of giving a general condition for the validity of the parallel inference, I suggest a modern (...) treatment via an expanded predicate logic account. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  35
    Christopher Gauker (2013). Logical Nihilism in Contemporary French Philosophy. Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 32 (2):65-79.
    Recanati takes for granted the conveyance conception of linguistic communica- tion, although it is not very clear exactly where he lies on the spectrum of possible variations. Even if we disavow all such conceptions of linguistic communication, there will be a place for semantic theory in articulating normative concepts such as logical consistency and logical validity. An approach to semantics focused on such normative concepts is illustrated using the example of ““It’’s raining””. It is argued that Recanati’’s (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10.  48
    J. P. Cleave (1970). The Notion of Validity in Logical Systems with Inexact Predicates. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 21 (3):269-274.
  11.  11
    Wolfgang Stegmüller (1964). Remarks on the Completeness of Logical Systems Relative to the Validity-Concepts of P. Lorenzen and K. Lorenz. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 5 (2):81-112.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  12.  11
    Stefan Nowak (1978). Logical and Empirical Assumptions of Validity of Inductions. Synthese 37 (3):321 - 349.
  13.  3
    Gordon L. Brumm (1962). The Method of Possibility-Diagrams for Testing the Validity of Certain Types of Inferences, Based on Jevons' Logical Alphabet. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 3 (4):209-233.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  41
    Michael Baumgartner (2013). Exhibiting Interpretational and Representational Validity. Synthese (7):1-25.
    A natural language argument may be valid in at least two nonequivalent senses: it may be interpretationally or representationally valid (Etchemendy in The concept of logical consequence. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1990). Interpretational and representational validity can both be formally exhibited by classical first-order logic. However, as these two notions of informal validity differ extensionally and first-order logic fixes one determinate extension for the notion of formal validity (or consequence), some arguments must be formalized by unrelated (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15.  83
    William H. Hanson (2006). Actuality, Necessity, and Logical Truth. Philosophical Studies 130 (3):437 - 459.
    The traditional view that all logical truths are metaphysically necessary has come under attack in recent years. The contrary claim is prominent in David Kaplan’s work on demonstratives, and Edward Zalta has argued that logical truths that are not necessary appear in modal languages supplemented only with some device for making reference to the actual world (and thus independently of whether demonstratives like ‘I’, ‘here’, and ‘now’ are present). If this latter claim can be sustained, it strikes close (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  16.  42
    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 (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  17.  30
    William H. Hanson (2014). Logical Truth in Modal Languages: Reply to Nelson and Zalta. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 167 (2):327-339.
    Does general validity or real world validity better represent the intuitive notion of logical truth for sentential modal languages with an actuality connective? In (Philosophical Studies 130:436–459, 2006) I argued in favor of general validity, and I criticized the arguments of Zalta (Journal of Philosophy 85:57–74, 1988) for real world validity. But in Nelson and Zalta (Philosophical Studies 157:153–162, 2012) Michael Nelson and Edward Zalta criticize my arguments and claim to have established the superiority of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  13
    Alexandra Zinke (2015). On Exhibiting Representational Validity. Synthese 192 (4):1157-1171.
    We can distinguish two non-equivalent ways in which a natural language argument can be valid: it can be interpretationally or representationally valid. However, there is just one notion of classical first-order validity for formal languages: truth-preservation in all classical first-order models. To ease the tension, Baumgartner suggests that we should understand interpretational and representational validity as imposing different adequacy conditions on formalizations of natural language arguments. I argue against this proposal. To that end, I first show that Baumgartner’s (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19.  59
    Christopher Gauker (2014). How Many Bare Demonstratives Are There in English? Linguistics and Philosophy 37 (4):291-314.
    In order to capture our intuitions about the logical consistency of sentences and the logical validity of arguments, a semantics for a natural language has to allow for the fact that different occurrences of a single bare demonstrative, such as “this”, may refer to different objects. But it is not obvious how to formulate a semantic theory in order to achieve this result. This paper first criticizes several proposals: that we should formulate our semantics as a semantics (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20. 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 nature. I (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  21.  58
    Christopher Gauker (1990). Semantics Without Reference. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31 (3):437-461.
    A theory of reference may be either an analysis of reference or merely an account of the correct use of the verb "refer". If we define the validity of arguments in the standard way, in terms of assignments of individuals and sets to the nonlogical vocabulary of the language, then we will be committed to seeking an analysis of reference. Those who prefer a metalinguistic account, therefore, will desire an alternative to standard semantics. One alternative is the Quinean conception (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  86
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Pablo Cobreros (2011). Varzi on Supervaluationism and Logical Consequence. Mind 120 (479):833-43.
    Though it is standardly assumed that supervaluationism applied to vagueness is committed to global validity, Achille Varzi (2007) argues that the supervaluationist should take seriously the idea of adopting local validity instead. Varzi’s motivation for the adoption of local validity is largely based on two objections against the global notion: that it brings some counterexamples to classically valid rules of inference and that it is inconsistent with unrestricted higher-order vagueness. In this discussion I review these objections and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  24. Charlie Kurth (2011). Logic for Morals, Morals From Logic. Philosophical Studies 155 (2):161-180.
    The need to distinguish between logical and extra-logical varieties of inference, entailment, validity, and consistency has played a prominent role in meta-ethical debates between expressivists and descriptivists. But, to date, the importance that matters of logical form play in these distinctions has been overlooked. That’s a mistake given the foundational place that logical form plays in our understanding of the difference between the logical and the extra-logical. This essay argues that descriptivists are better (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  9
    Author unknown, Validity and Soundness. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Julien Murzi (2014). The Inexpressibility of Validity. Analysis 74 (1):65-81.
    Tarski's Undefinability of Truth Theorem comes in two versions: that no consistent theory which interprets Robinson's Arithmetic (Q) can prove all instances of the T-Scheme and hence define truth; and that no such theory, if sound, can even express truth. In this note, I prove corresponding limitative results for validity. While Peano Arithmetic already has the resources to define a predicate expressing logical validity, as Jeff Ketland has recently pointed out (2012, Validity as a primitive. Analysis (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  27.  21
    Stephan Leuenberger (2013). De Jure and De Facto Validity in the Logic of Time and Modality. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):196-205.
    What formulas are tense-logically valid depends on the structure of time, for example on whether it has a beginning. Logicians have investigated what formulas correspond to what physical hypotheses about time. Analogously, we can investigate what formulas of modal logic correspond to what metaphysical hypotheses about necessity. It is widely held that physical hypotheses about time may be contingent. If so, tense-logical validity may be contingent. In contrast, validity in modal logic is typically taken to be non-contingent, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28.  6
    Richard B. Angell (2001). The 'Most Important and Fundamental' Distinction in Logic. Informal Logic 21 (1).
    Personal reflections on the philosophical career of Henry Johnstone, B.S. Haverford College, 1942, and Ph.D. Harvard, 1950, professor at Williams College 1948-1952 and Pennsylvania State University, 1952 - 2000. Founder and editor of Philosophy and Rhetoric, Johnstone wrote eight books, including two logic texts, three monographs, and over 150 articles or reviews. The focus is on his efforts to resolve problems stemming from the conflict between the logical empiricism Johnstone embraced in his dissertation, and the arguments of his absolute (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  8
    Yukio Iwakuma (1987). Instantiae: An Introduction to a Twelfth Century Technique of Argumentation. [REVIEW] Argumentation 1 (4):437-453.
    An instantia is a technique to refute other's arguments, found in many tracts from the latter half of the twelfth century. An instantia has (or appears to have) the same form as the argument to be refuted and its falsity is more evident than that of the argument.Precursors of instantiae are among the teachings of masters active in the first half of the century. These masters produce counter-arguments against various inferential forms in order to examine their validity. But the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. John Corcoran & Susan Wood (1980). Boole's Criteria for Validity and Invalidity. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 21 (4):609-638.
    It is one thing for a given proposition to follow or to not follow from a given set of propositions and it is quite another thing for it to be shown either that the given proposition follows or that it does not follow.* Using a formal deduction to show that a conclusion follows and using a countermodel to show that a conclusion does not follow are both traditional practices recognized by Aristotle and used down through the history of logic. These (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  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 (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  27
    Mark T. Nelson (1995). Is It Always Fallacious to Derive Values From Facts? Argumentation 9 (4):553-562.
    Charles Pigden has argued for a logical Is/Ought gap on the grounds of the conservativeness of logic. I offer a counter-example which shows that Pigden’s argument is unsound and that there need be no logical gap between Is-premises and an Ought-conclusion. My counter-example is an argument which is logically valid, has only Is-premises and an Ought-conclusion, does not purport to violate the conservativeness of logic, and does not rely on controversial assumptions about Aristotelian biology or 'institutional facts.'.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  33.  86
    Edgar Andrade-Lotero & Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2012). Validity, the Squeezing Argument and Alternative Semantic Systems: The Case of Aristotelian Syllogistic. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):387-418.
    We investigate the philosophical significance of the existence of different semantic systems with respect to which a given deductive system is sound and complete. Our case study will be Corcoran’s deductive system D for Aristotelian syllogistic and some of the different semantic systems for syllogistic that have been proposed in the literature. We shall prove that they are not equivalent, in spite of D being sound and complete with respect to each of them. Beyond the specific case of syllogistic, the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  28
    Arnon Avron, Furio Honsell, Marino Miculan & Cristian Paravano (1998). Encoding Modal Logics in Logical Frameworks. Studia Logica 60 (1):161-208.
    We present and discuss various formalizations of Modal Logics in Logical Frameworks based on Type Theories. We consider both Hilbert- and Natural Deduction-style proof systems for representing both truth (local) and validity (global) consequence relations for various Modal Logics. We introduce several techniques for encoding the structural peculiarities of necessitation rules, in the typed -calculus metalanguage of the Logical Frameworks. These formalizations yield readily proof-editors for Modal Logics when implemented in Proof Development Environments, such as Coq or (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  27
    Matthew William McKeon (2009). A Plea for Logical Objects. Synthese 167 (1):163 - 182.
    An account of validity that makes what is invalid conditional on how many individuals there are is what I call a conditional account of validity. Here I defend conditional accounts against a criticism derived from Etchemendy’s well-known criticism of the model-theoretic analysis of validity. The criticism is essentially that knowledge of the size of the universe is non-logical and so by making knowledge of the extension of validity depend on knowledge of how many individuals there (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  7
    Edgar Andrade-Lotero & Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2012). Validity, the Squeezing Argument and Alternative Semantic Systems: The Case of Aristotelian Syllogistic. [REVIEW] Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):387 - 418.
    We investigate the philosophical significance of the existence of different semantic systems with respect to which a given deductive system is sound and complete. Our case study will be Corcoran's deductive system D for Aristotelian syllogistic and some of the different semantic systems for syllogistic that have been proposed in the literature. We shall prove that they are not equivalent, in spite of D being sound and complete with respect to each of them. Beyond the specific case of syllogistic, the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Gil Sagi (2014). Formality in Logic: From Logical Terms to Semantic Constraints. Logique Et Analyse 57 (227).
    In this paper I discuss a prevailing view by which logical terms determine forms of sentences and arguments and therefore the logical validity of arguments. This view is common to those who hold that there is a principled distinction between logical and nonlogical terms and those holding relativistic accounts. I adopt the Tarskian tradition by which logical validity is determined by form, but reject the centrality of logical terms. I propose an alternative framework (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38.  11
    Uwe Meixner (1995). Ontologically Minimal Logical Semantics. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36 (2):279-298.
    Ontologically minimal truth law semantics are provided for various branches of formal logic (classical propositional logic, S5 modal propositional logic, intuitionistic propositional logic, classical elementary predicate logic, free logic, and elementary arithmetic). For all of them logical validity/truth is defined in an ontologically minimal way, that is, not via truth value assignments or interpretations. Semantical soundness and completeness are proved (in an ontologically minimal way) for a calculus of classical elementary predicate logic.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. Paul Weingartner (2011). God's Existence: Can It Be Proven? A Logical Commentary on the Five Ways of Thomas Aquinas. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3 (1):243 - 248.
    The aim of the book is to show that the ’five ways’ of Thomas Aquinas, i.e., his five arguments to prove the existence of God, are logically correct arguments by the standards of modern predicate logic. In the first chapter this is done by commenting on the two preliminary articles preceding the five ways in which Thomas Aquinas points out that on the one hand the existence of God is not self-evident to us and on the other hand, that, similar (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. 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 such (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Michael Baumgartner (2010). Informal Reasoning and Logical Formalization. In S. Conrad & S. Imhof (eds.), Ding und Begriff. Ontos
    According to a prevalent view among philosophers formal logic is the philosopher’s main tool to assess the validity of arguments, i.e. the philosopher’s ars iudicandi. By drawing on a famous dispute between Russell and Strawson over the validity of a certain kind of argument – of arguments whose premises feature definite descriptions – this paper casts doubt on the accuracy of the ars iudicandi conception. Rather than settling the question whether the contentious arguments are valid or not, Russell (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  42. Michael Nelson & Edward N. Zalta (2012). A Defense of Contingent Logical Truths. Philosophical Studies 157 (1):153-162.
    A formula is a contingent logical truth when it is true in every model M but, for some model M , false at some world of M . We argue that there are such truths, given the logic of actuality. Our argument turns on defending Tarski’s definition of truth and logical truth, extended so as to apply to modal languages with an actuality operator. We argue that this extension is the philosophically proper account of validity. We counter (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  43.  75
    Robert Jubb (2009). Logical and Epistemic Foundationalism About Grounding: The Triviality of Facts and Principles. Res Publica 15 (4):337-353.
    In this paper, I seek to undermine G.A. Cohen ’s polemical use of a metaethical claim he makes in his article, ‘ Facts and Principles’, by arguing that that use requires an unsustainable equivocation between epistemic and logical grounding. I begin by distinguishing three theses that Cohen has offered during the course of his critique of Rawls and contractualism more generally, the foundationalism about grounding thesis, the justice as non-regulative thesis, and the justice as all-encompassing thesis, and briefly (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  44. Crispin Wright (2004). Intuition, Entitlement and the Epistemology of Logical Laws. Dialectica 58 (1):155–175.
    The essay addresses the well‐known idea that there has to be a place for intuition, thought of as a kind of non‐inferential rational insight, in the epistemology of basic logic if our knowledge of its principles is non‐empirical and is to allow of any finite, non‐circular reconstruction. It is argued that the error in this idea consists in its overlooking the possibility that there is, properly speaking, no knowledge of the validity of principles of basic logic. When certain important (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  45.  25
    Lionel Shapiro (2015). Naive Structure, Contraction and Paradox. Topoi 34 (1):75-87.
    Rejecting structural contraction has been proposed as a strategy for escaping semantic paradoxes. The challenge for its advocates has been to make intuitive sense of how contraction might fail. I offer a way of doing so, based on a “naive” interpretation of the relation between structure and logical vocabulary in a sequent proof system. The naive interpretation of structure motivates the most common way of blaming Curry-style paradoxes on illicit contraction. By contrast, the naive interpretation will not as easily (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  46. Gilbert Plumer (2001). Phenomenological Argumentative Structure. Argumentation 15 (2):173-189.
    The nontechnical ability to identify or match argumentative structure seems to be an important reasoning skill. Instruments that have questions designed to measure this skill include major standardized tests for graduate school admission, for example, the United States-Canadian Law School Admission Test (LSAT), the Graduate Record Examinations (GRE), and the Graduate Management Admission Test (GMAT). Writers and reviewers of such tests need an appropriate foundation for developing such questions--they need a proper representation of phenomenological argumentative structure--for legitimacy, and because these (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47.  87
    Pablo Cobreros (2008). Supervaluationism and Logical Consequence: A Third Way. Studia Logica 90 (3):291 - 312.
    It is often assumed that the supervaluationist theory of vagueness is committed to a global notion of logical consequence, in contrast with the local notion characteristic of modal logics. There are, at least, two problems related to the global notion of consequence. First, it brings some counterexamples to classically valid patterns of inference. Second, it is subject to an objection related to higher-order vagueness . This paper explores a third notion of logical consequence, and discusses its adequacy for (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  48.  10
    Colin R. Caret & Zach Weber (2015). A Note on Contraction-Free Logic for Validity. Topoi 34 (1):63-74.
    This note motivates a logic for a theory that can express its own notion of logical consequence—a ‘syntactically closed’ theory of naive validity. The main issue for such a logic is Curry’s paradox, which is averted by the failure of contraction. The logic features two related, but different, implication connectives. A Hilbert system is proposed that is complete and non-trivial.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49.  71
    James Ladyman, Stuart Presnell, Anthony J. Short & Berry Groisman (2007). The Connection Between Logical and Thermodynamic Irreversibility. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 38 (1):58-79.
    There has recently been a good deal of controversy about Landauer's Principle, which is often stated as follows: The erasure of one bit of information in a computational device is necessarily accompanied by a generation of kTln2 heat. This is often generalised to the claim that any logically irreversible operation cannot be implemented in a thermodynamically reversible way. John Norton (2005) and Owen Maroney (2005) both argue that Landauer's Principle has not been shown to hold in general, and Maroney offers (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  50.  89
    Gillian Russell (2008). One True Logic? Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):593 - 611.
    This is a paper about the constituents of arguments. It argues that several different kinds of truth-bearer may be taken to compose arguments, but that none of the obvious candidates—sentences, propositions, sentence/truth-value pairs etc.—make sense of logic as it is actually practiced. The paper goes on to argue that by answering the question in different ways, we can generate different logics, thus ensuring a kind of logical pluralism that is different from that of J. Beall and Greg Restall.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000