Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Logical Pluralism and Interpretations of Logical Systems.Diego Tajer & Camillo Fiore - forthcoming - Logic and Logical Philosophy:1-26.
    Logical pluralism is a general idea that there is more than one correct logic. Carnielli and Rodrigues [2019a] defend an epistemic interpretation of the paraconsistent logic N4, according to which an argument is valid in this logic just in case it necessarily preserves evidence. The authors appeal to this epistemic interpretation to briefly motivate a kind of logical pluralism: “different accounts of logical consequence may preserve different properties of propositions”. The aim of this paper is to study the prospect of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A simple solution to the collapse argument for logical pluralism.Diego Tajer - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.
    Many philosophers have argued that logical pluralism is not compatible with the normativity of logic. They developed different versions of the collapse argument: if two logics are correct, then the weaker one will be normatively irrelevant. In this paper, I argue that the collapse argument is based on a controversial premise: the assumption that every logic can be characterized by the same bridge principle. I provide a solution to the collapse argument based on the modification of this premise, maintaining both (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Non-Normative Logical Pluralism and the Revenge of the Normativity Objection.Erik Stei - 2020 - Philosophical Quarterly 70 (278):162–177.
    Logical pluralism is the view that there is more than one correct logic. Most logical pluralists think that logic is normative in the sense that you make a mistake if you accept the premisses of a valid argument but reject its conclusion. Some authors have argued that this combination is self-undermining: Suppose that L1 and L2 are correct logics that coincide except for the argument from Γ to φ, which is valid in L1 but invalid in L2. If you accept (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Logical theory revision through data underdetermination: an anti-exceptionalist exercise.Sanderson Molick - 2021 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 25 (1).
    The anti-exceptionalist debate brought into play the problem of what are the relevant data for logical theories and how such data affects the validities accepted by a logical theory. In the present paper, I depart from Laudan's reticulated model of science to analyze one aspect of this problem, namely of the role of logical data within the process of revision of logical theories. For this, I argue that the ubiquitous nature of logical data is responsible for the proliferation of several (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Limits of Abductivism About Logic.Ulf Hlobil - 2021 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 103 (2):320-340.
    I argue against abductivism about logic, which is the view that rational theory choice in logic happens by abduction. Abduction cannot serve as a neutral arbiter in many foundational disputes in logic because, in order to use abduction, one must first identify the relevant data. Which data one deems relevant depends on what I call one's conception of logic. One's conception of logic is, however, not independent of one's views regarding many of the foundational disputes that one may hope to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Double Trouble for Logical Pluralists.J. W. Evershed - 2021 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 121 (3):411-424.
    According to tradition, logic is normative for reasoning. According to many contemporary philosophers of logic, there is more than one correct logic. What is the relationship between these two strands of thought? This paper makes two claims. First, logic is doubly normative for reasoning because, in addition to constraining the combinations of beliefs that we may have, logic also constrains the methods by which we may form them. Second, given that logic is doubly normative for reasoning, a wide array of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reasons, basing, and the normative collapse of logical pluralism.Christopher Blake-Turner - 2021 - Philosophical Studies 178 (12):4099-4118.
    Logical pluralism is the view that there is more than one correct logic. A key objection to logical pluralism is that it collapses into monism. The core of the Collapse Objection is that only the pluralist’s strongest logic does any genuine normative work; since a logic must do genuine normative work, this means that the pluralist is really a monist, who is committed to her strongest logic being the one true logic. This paper considers a neglected question in the collapse (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Logical anti‐exceptionalism meets the “logic‐as‐models” approach.Jonas R. Becker Arenhart - 2022 - Theoria 88 (6):1211-1227.
    Logical anti-exceptionalism is the view that logic is not special, it is continuous with science. This continuity is typically understood in terms of the use of the abductive method in logical theory choice, with logical knowledge resulting from our choice of the theory best accounting for the data. In this paper, we argue for two related claims: (i) that this understanding of the continuity between logic and science faces considerable challenges; and (ii) that such challenges may be avoided by elaborating (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Abductivism as a New Epistemology for Logic?Jonas Rafael Becker Arenhart - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-19.
    Logical abductivism features in the recent literature as a new epistemology for logic, in connection with logical anti-exceptionalism. According to this account, (i) logical knowledge is obtained by the justified choice of a logical theory using abduction, which (ii) replaces problematic approaches in traditional logical epistemology. We argue that such claims are not properly warranted; they conflate justification and theory choice methods. Abduction requires that one starts with justified data, and justification, in such cases, needs to appeal to sources that (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Anti-exceptionalism, truth and the BA-plan.Eduardo Alejandro Barrio, Federico Pailos & Joaquín Toranzo Calderón - 2021 - Synthese 199 (5-6):12561-12586.
    Anti-exceptionalism about logic states that logical theories have no special epistemological status. Such theories are continuous with scientific theories. Contemporary anti-exceptionalists include the semantic paradoxes as a part of the elements to accept a logical theory. Exploring the Buenos Aires Plan, the recent development of the metainferential hierarchy of ST\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\mathbf {ST}}$$\end{document}-logics shows that there are multiple options to deal with such paradoxes. There is a whole ST\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Carnapian Lessons for Anti-Exceptionalism about Logic.Jonas Rafael Becker Arenhart & Ivan Ferreira da Cunha - forthcoming - History and Philosophy of Logic:1-12.
    This paper aims at disentangling two distinct problems in present philosophy of logic: the a priori/a posteriori divide and the theory choice problem. A confusion of these problems is present in the heart of current anti-exceptionalism about logic, as the use of a posteriori methods is identified with theory choice. We illustrate how the division may be preserved in a version of anti-exceptionalism by discussing Carnap’s approach, which had both an a priori epistemology and a pragmatic account of logical theory (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Logical Truth.Paal Fjeldvig Antonsen - 2019 - Australasian Journal of Logic 16 (7):187-201.
    On the model-theoretic account, a sentence is logically true just in case it is true on all possible semantic interpretations. We dierentiate four ways one can interpret the modality 'possible' in this definition, and argue that one of these readings is not subject to the criticism levelled against the model-theoretic account by Etchemendy. By explicating the four readings we also draw some consequences for what linguistic evidence a selection of logical theories should be sensitive to.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Islamic Contradictory Theology . . . Is there any such Thing?Abbas Ahsan - 2021 - Logica Universalis 15 (2).
    The application of paraconsistent logics to theological contradictions is a fascinating move. Jc Beall’s (J Anal Theol, 7(1): 400–439, 2019) paper entitled ‘Christ—A Contradiction: A Defense of ‘Contradictory Christology’ is a notable example. Beall proposes a solution to the fundamental problem of Christology. His solution aims at making the case, and defending the viability of, what he has termed, ‘Contradictory Christology’. There are at least two essential components of Beall’s ‘Contradictory Christology’. These include the dogmatic statements of Chalcedon and FDE (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Subject Matter of Logic: Explaining what logic is about.Elizabeth Olsen - 2021 - Dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington
    Logicians disagree about how validity—the very heart of logic—should be understood. Many different formal systems have been born due to this disagreement. This thesis examines how teachers explain the subject matter of logic to students in introductory logic textbooks, and demonstrates the different explanations teachers use. These differences help explain why logicians have different intuitions about validity.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Logical Form and the Limits of Thought.Manish Oza - 2020 - Dissertation, University of Toronto
    What is the relation of logic to thinking? My dissertation offers a new argument for the claim that logic is constitutive of thinking in the following sense: representational activity counts as thinking only if it manifests sensitivity to logical rules. In short, thinking has to be minimally logical. An account of thinking has to allow for our freedom to question or revise our commitments – even seemingly obvious conceptual connections – without loss of understanding. This freedom, I argue, requires that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The value of thinking and the normativity of logic.Manish Oza - 2020 - Philosophers' Imprint 20 (25):1-23.
    (1) This paper is about how to build an account of the normativity of logic around the claim that logic is constitutive of thinking. I take the claim that logic is constitutive of thinking to mean that representational activity must tend to conform to logic to count as thinking. (2) I develop a natural line of thought about how to develop the constitutive position into an account of logical normativity by drawing on constitutivism in metaethics. (3) I argue that, while (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation