Both logic and philosophy of science investigate formal aspects of scientific discourse, i.e. properties of (non-monotonic) consequence operations for discursive logic. In the present paper we handle two of them: paraconsistency and enthymematycity.

Causality is a concept which is sometimes claimed to be easy to illustrate, but hard to explain. It is not quite clear whether the former part of this claim is as obvious as the latter one. I will not present any specific theory of causation. Our aim is much less ambitious; to investigate the formal counterparts of causal relations between events, i.e. to propose a formal framework which enables us to construct metamathematical counterparts of causal relations between singular events. This (...) should be a good starting point to define formal counterparts for concepts like causal law, causal explanation and so on. (shrink)

The promise of Newtonian science to create a universal precise explanation of all phenomena seems to be out-dated. “Cutting through complexity” may kill potential solutions. The complexity of real phenomena should be accepted and at best tamed by appropriate techniques. Complexity, a recent megatrend in the sciences, may effectuate another scientific revolution.

Science today is an international business, of course, and there has hardly ever been a partition wall between the logical work in Poland and Germany. However, apart from long lasting personal scientific contacts there are good reasons to further intensify the relations between the German and the Polish Community of Logic and Logical Philosophy. So it was only natural to think about bringing them together at a scientific event in a friendly environment. This idea was carried out as a common (...) initiative of the Polish Association for Logic and Theory of Science (PTL) and of the German based Society for Analytic Philosophy (GAP). The First German-Polish Workshop on Logic and Logical Philosophy was held in Bachotek/Poland from September 10.–13., 1995. It was organized by Kazimierz Świrydowicz (PTL), Heinrich Wansing (GAP) and Max Urchs (both). This part of the present volume of Logic and Logical Philosophy is not the proceedings of the workshop. On one hand, not all the papers presented at the workshop (see previous page for the programme) are attended to this volume. Due to their more technical character, the contributions of Gregory Restall, Tomasz Skura, Heinrich Wansing, Andrzej Wroński and others will appear in the next number of Reports on Mathematical Logic. Some papers included in this issue were changed considerably for publication. On the other hand, colleagues who intended to join the workshop but had to cancel for some reason were invited to submit their material, too. We would like to thank the editors of both journals very kindly for their suggestion to publish the submitted material. (shrink)

Scientific explanations arc subject to the occurrence of inconsistencies. To rule them out in many cases demands the construction of new theories. As the examples of complementary explanations show, that may take a while. Furthermore, even if possible in principle, it is not always reasonable to eliminate inconsistencies immediately, e.g., by bringing in a more sophisticated formal language. After all, under some circumstances a provisional, not fully coherent explanation may be better than none. In any case, we need a logically (...) controlled approach to such inconsistencies. Modern logic provides the tools which are necessary to solve this task. We will mention two alternative approaches. (shrink)

At a conference in Athen some time ago, I had the honour to comment on Aldo Bressan’s lecture “On certain notions, partly extensional and partly modal, relevant for the semantics of general relativity”. A version of this lecture constitutes the first part of his paper “Again on relativistic semantics”. At Aldo Bressan’s request, I will outline the criticism put forward at the Athens conference. My comment does not, however, pertain to the second part of the preceding publication. Bressan’s considerations on (...) time and causality — which in fact illustrate the capability of the previously explained technical apparatus — are enlightening and truly stimulating. (shrink)

Cognitive psychology investigates the structural properties of human reasoning. We review some achievements of this kind of research and give a critical evaluation of its methods.

Lying is an ubiquitous element of communication. Amazingly enough, the topic is almost completely ignored by traditional logic. The usual example, Eubulides’ antinomy, is not a good one: intuitively, “the Liar” doesn’t lie. There are not many further approaches to be found in the literature. Why is this? There are quite a few reasons. We will consider them one by one and disclose further properties of lies at the same time. We sketch a general framework for the formal analysis of (...) lying. As a result we observe that non-adjunctive calculi fits in here quite comfortably. (shrink)

Classical logic, intuitionism, relevant logics and many other systems try to express implication as an entailment. The Jaskowski system Qf describes implication in connection with causality. Syntactic properties of Qf have been examined by Pieczkowski [4], [5]. The semantic characterization of Qf is the aim of this paper.

It seems that Polish logic has always been open to considerationsconcerning the use of methods and results of formal logic within disciplines.We overview a couple of such Polish contributions to what may be called therealm of applied logic. We take a closer look at the formalization of naturalreasoning, inconsistency-tolerant logic, and at the formal analysis of causalnexus.

Considering the growing need for formal counterparts of causal nexus (AI is desperately looking for a good one!) and thus trying to construct appropriate relations within a formal framework one faces the problem that the notion of “causal connection” is by no means explained with sufficient precision. How to overcome the resulting difficulties?

Im Rahmen der formalen Logik versucht man auf verschiedene Art und Weise Implikationen zu definieren, die den intuitiven Gehalt der "weil..., darum..." Beziehung wiedergeben. Einige dieser Formalisierungsansätze werden vorgestellt. Am Beispiele einer auf Jaśkowski zurückgehenden Konzeption wird demonstriert, wie man kausale Beziehungen repräsentierende Funktoren semantisch charakterisieren kann. Man konstruiert dazu zunächst n-dimensionale Kripke-Modelle, in denen eine nichtklassische aussagenlogische Sprache interpretiert wird. Die Ausdrucksmittel der Sprache gestatten die Definition verschiedener Kausalfunktoren, deren Eigenschaften überdies von der jeweiligen Modellklasse abhängen. Man erhält also (...) eine Vielzahl formaler Entsprechungen für die intuitive Kausalbeziehung, unter denen die den jeweiligen Anschauungen am nächsten kommende auszuwählen ist. (shrink)

W pracy prezentowane są niektóre wyniki dotyczące wprowadzonej, w jednej z poprzednich prac autora, klasy tzw. dyskusyjnych systemów Jaśkowskiego. W szczególności zwraca się uwagę na parakonsystentność owych systemów, brak reguły dołączania prawdziwościowej koniunkcji oraz respektowanie reguły dołączania tzw. koniunkcji dyskusyjnej w każdym z tych systemów. Jako specjalne systemy parakonsystentne stanowią one punkt wyjścia do dyskusji nad pewnymi własnościami logik parakonsystentnych. Autor poddaje krytyce stanowisko Priesta na temat roli dołączania koniunkcji dla logik parakonsystentnych oraz sensowność pojęć ścisłej parakonsystencji.

The author points out that in some cases there are two distinct descriptions of the same phenomenon. The first one by means of the theory of chaos, the second - by the theory of causal relationship. The thesis is that these descriptions are not inconsistent but appear at different levels of abstraction.

In times of modern information technology, the world of science is becoming smaller. Does this mean that there will be no more provinces? We do not think so. Setting out from Leszek Nowak's thought “province is where one thinks not on one's own account but on account of another,” we indicate a number of processes that perpetuate provinces. These processes are driven by specific access to scientific knowledge, by education, by new forms of communication, by shortage of financial support and (...) the concentration of resources. We look at the interplay between criteria of theory choice and location on the scientific map. Next, we explore the connection between geo-social and scientific provinces, taking into consideration political and cultural parameters. The conceptual framework of metropolises and provinces in science turns out to be, though not all-embracing, an extremely fruitful one. (shrink)

Some modern philosophers have retrieved the old idea that the identification of facts and events is dependent on language. For instance, Davidson holds that ...

Perspectives on Time deals with the problem of time from different perspectives such as logic, physics and philosophy. It contains 18 previously unpublished papers, written by philosophers from various European countries, as well as a large introduction about the history and the main situation in the respective fields today. The prominent issues which are addressed in this book concern the direction of time, the reality of tenses, the objectivity of becoming, the existence in time, and the logical structures of reasoning (...) about time. The papers have been written based on different approaches, partly depending on whether the authors subscribe to an A-theory or a B-theory of time. (shrink)

Since the late eighties, a sequel of annual workshops on logic and analytic philosophy has been held on the Island of Poel near Wismar, close to both Gottlob Frege’s grave and to his house in Bad Kleinen. The meeting last year, however, was held in Graal-Müritz and was devoted to Ontologic. It was organised by Jerzy Perzanowski, Uwe Scheffler and Max Urchs. The present number of Logic and Logical Philosophy is not exactly the proceedings of the 94’ conference. On (...) one hand, not all the papers presented at the workshop (see next page for the programme) are included in this volume, while others were changed considerably. On the other hand, colleagues who were to come but had to cancel for some reason were invited to submit their material, too. (shrink)

This volume presents a wide-ranging overview of the contemporary debate and includes some of its foremost participants.

In [13] M. Urchs comments on my paper [5]. I think these comments are very useful, especially because (on p. 38) the author decides to “proceed with some methodological remarks concerning Bressan’s account and his underlying attitude towards logical formalization in general”, and thus he refers not only to [5].

The Protestant ethic — a moral code stressing hard work, rigorous self-discipline, and the organization of one's life in the service of God — was made famous by sociologist and political economist Max Weber. In this brilliant study (his best-known and most controversial), he opposes the Marxist concept of dialectical materialism and its view that change takes place through "the struggle of opposites." Instead, he relates the rise of a capitalist economy to the Puritan determination to work out anxiety over (...) salvation or damnation by performing good deeds — an effort that ultimately discouraged belief in predestination and encouraged capitalism. Weber's classic study has long been required reading in college and advanced high school social studies classrooms. (shrink)

This book is a defense of the methods of analytic philosophy against a recent empirical challenge to the soundness of those methods. The challenge is raised by practitioners of “experimental philosophy” and concerns the extent to which analytic philosophy relies on intuition—in particular, the extent to which analytic philosophers treat intuitions as evidence in arguing for philosophical conclusions. Experimental philosophers say that analytic philosophers place a great deal of evidential weight on people’s intuitions about hypothetical cases and thought experiments. This (...) book argues that this view of traditional philosophical method is a myth, part of “metaphilosophical folklore.” Analytic philosophy makes regular use of hypothetical examples and thought experiments, but philosophers argue for their claims about what is true or not true in these examples and thought experiments. It is these arguments, not intuitions, that are treated as evidence for the claims. The book discusses xphi and some recent xphi studies; critiques a variety of other metaphilosophical claims; examines such famous arguments as Gettier’s refutation of the JTB theory and Kripke’s Gödel Case argument against descriptivism about proper names, and shows that they rely on reasoning rather than intuition; and finds existing critiques of xphi, the “Multiple Concepts” and “Expertise” replies, to be severely lacking. (shrink)

The book "Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience" is an engaging criticism of cognitive neuroscience from the perspective of a Wittgensteinian philosophy of ordinary language. The authors' main claim is that assertions like "the brain sees" and "the left hemisphere thinks" are integral to cognitive neuroscience but that they are meaningless because they commit the mereological fallacy—ascribing to parts of humans, properties that make sense to predicate only of whole humans. The authors claim that this fallacy is at the heart of Cartesian (...) dualism, implying that current cognitive neuroscientists are Cartesian dualists. Against this claim, we argue that the fallacy cannot be committed within Cartesian dualism either, for this doctrine does not allow for an intelligible way of asserting that a soul is part of a human being. Also, the authors' Aristotelian essentialistic outlook is at odds with their Wittgensteinian stance, and we were unconvinced by their case against explanatory reductionism. Finally, although their Wittgensteinian stance is congenial with radical behaviorism, their separation between philosophy and science seems less so because it is based on a view of philosophy as a priori. The authors' emphasis on the a priori, however, does not necessarily commit them to rationalism if it is restricted to conceptual or analytical truths. (shrink)

I explore physics implications of the External Reality Hypothesis (ERH) that there exists an external physical reality completely independent of us humans. I argue that with a sufficiently broad definition of mathematics, it implies the Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (MUH) that our physical world is an abstract mathematical structure. I discuss various implications of the ERH and MUH, ranging from standard physics topics like symmetries, irreducible representations, units, free parameters, randomness and initial conditions to broader issues like consciousness, parallel universes and (...) Gödel incompleteness. I hypothesize that only computable and decidable (in Gödel’s sense) structures exist, which alleviates the cosmological measure problem and may help explain why our physical laws appear so simple. I also comment on the intimate relation between mathematical structures, computations, simulations and physical systems. (shrink)

Advocates of conceptual engineering as a method of philosophy face a dilemma: either they are ignorant of how conceptual engineering can be implemented, or else it is trivial to implement but of very little value, representing no new or especially fruitful method of philosophizing. Two key distinctions frame this dilemma and explain its two horns. First, the distinction between speaker’s meaning and reference and semantic meaning and reference reveals a severe implementation problem for one construal of conceptual engineering. Second, the (...) distinction between stipulating meanings and conceptually analyzing allows us to see why, on another construal of what conceptual engineering involves, the practice is neither a new nor neglected philosophical methodology. The article also argues that semantic externalism is not the root of the implementation problem for conceptual engineering, and that the usual rationale for adopting the practice, one that ties its value to the amelioration of “conceptual defects”, is unsound. (shrink)