Abstract
This paper establishes a sound and complete semantics for the impure logic of ground. Fine (Review of Symbolic Logic, 5(1), 1–25, 2012a) sets out a system for the pure logic of ground, one in which the formulas between which ground-theoretic claims hold have no internal logical complexity; and it provides a sound and complete semantics for the system. Fine (2012b) [§§6-8] sets out a system for an impure logic of ground, one that extends the rules of the original pure system with rules for the truth-functional connectives, the first-order quantifiers, and λ-abstraction. However, no semantics has yet been provided for this system. The present paper partly fills this lacuna by providing a sound and complete semantics for a system GG containing the truth-functional operators that is closely related to the truth-functional part of the system of Fine (2012b).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Angell, R.B. (1989). Deducibility, entailment and analytic consequence. In J. Norman and R. Sylvan, editors, Directions in Relevant Logic. Kluwer (pp. 119–44).
Correia, F. (2010). Grounding and truth-functions. Logique et Analyse, 53(211), 251–79.
Correia, F. (2017). An impure logic of representational grounding. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 46, 507–38.
deRosset, L. (2013). What is weak ground? Essays in Philosophy, 14(1), 7–18.
deRosset, L. (2014). On weak ground. Review of Symbolic Logic, 7(4), 713–44.
Fine, K. (2012a). The pure logic of ground. Review of Symbolic Logic, 5(1), 1–25.
Fine, K. (2012b). Guide to ground. In Benjamin Schnieder and Fabrice Correia, editors, Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality, pp. 37–80. Cambridge University Press. reprinted online in ‘Philosophers Annual’ for 2012 (eds. P. Grim, C. Armstrong, P. Shirreff, N-H Stear).
Fine, K. (2016). Angellic content. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 45(2), 199–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-015-9371-9.
Fine, K. (2017a). Survey on truthmaker semantics. In R. Hale, A. Miller, and C. Wright, editors, Companion to the Philosophy of Language, pp. 556–77. Blackwell.
Fine, K. (2017b). A Theory of truthmaker content I: conjunction, disjunction, and negation. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 46 (6), 625–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-016-9413-y.
Fine, K. (2020). Semantics. In M. Raven, editor, Routledge Handbook of Metaphysical Ground, pp. 501–9. Routledge.
Krämer, S. (2018a). Towards a theory of ground-theoretic content. Synthese, 195, 785–814.
Krämer, S. (2018b). Ground-theoretic equivalence. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02154-4https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02154-4 .
Litland, J.E. (2015). Grounding, explanation, and the limit of internality. The Philosophical Review, 124(4), 481–533.
Poggiolesi, F. (2016). On defining the notion of complete and immediate formal grounding. Synthese, 193(3), 3147–67.
Poggiolesi, F. (2018). On constructing a logic for the notion of complete and immediate formal grounding. Synthese, 195(3), 1231–54.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
deRosset, L., Fine, K. A Semantics for the Impure Logic of Ground. J Philos Logic 52, 415–493 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-022-09676-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-022-09676-2