Skip to main content
Log in

Inferentializing Semantics

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The entire development of modern logic is characterized by various forms of confrontation of what has come to be called proof theory with what has earned the label of model theory. For a long time the widely accepted view was that while model theory captures directly what logical formalisms are about, proof theory is merely our technical means of getting some incomplete grip on this; but in recent decades the situation has altered. Not only did proof theory expand into new realms, generalizing the concept of proof in various directions; many philosophers also realized that meaning may be seen as primarily consisting in certain rules rather than in language-world links. However, the possibility of construing meaning as an inferential role is often seen as essentially compromised by the limits of proof-theoretical means. The aim of this paper is to sort out the cluster of problems besetting logical inferentialism by disentangling and clarifying one of them, namely determining the power of various inferential frameworks as measured by that of explicitly semantic ones.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Brandom, R. (1994). Making it explicit. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Buss, S. R. (1998). Handbook of proof theory. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Carnap, R. (1943). Formalization of logic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dunn, J. M., & Hardegree, G. M. (2000). Algebraic methods in philosophical logic. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gentzen, G. (1934). Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen I. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39, 176–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gentzen, G. (1936). Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen II. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 41, 405–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hardegree, D. M. (2005). Completeness and super-valuations. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 34, 81–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kahle, R., & Schroeder-Heister, P. (2006). Proof-theoretic semantics. Synthèse, 148, 503–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kreisel, G. (1964). Hilbert’s programme. In P. Benacerraf & H. Putnam (Eds.), Philosophy of mathematics (pp. 157–180). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kreisel, G. (1968). A survey of proof theory. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 33, 321–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Murzi, J., & Hjortland, O. T. (2009). Inferentialism and the categoricity problem: reply to Raatikainen. Analysis, 69, 480–488.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Peregrin, J. (1997). Language and its models. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Peregrin, J. (2006). Meaning as an inferential role. Erkenntnis, 64, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Peregrin, J. (2008). An Inferentialist approach to semantics. Philosophy Compass, 3, 1208–1223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Prawitz, D. (2006). Meaning approached via proofs. Synthèse, 148, 507–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Prior, A. N. (1960/61). Runabout inference ticket. Analysis, 21, 38–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Raatikainen, P. (2008). On rules of inference and the meanings of logical constants. Analysis, 68, 282–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Read, S. (2004). Identity and harmony. Analysis, 64, 113–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Restall, G. (2000). Introduction to substructural logics. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tarski, A. (1933). Pojęcie prawdy v językach nauk dedukcyjnych. (Warsawa) (English translation The Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages in Tarski (1956), pp. 152–278).

  21. Tarski, A. (1936). Über den Begriff der logischen Folgerung. Actes du Congrés International de Philosophique Scientifique, 7, 1–11. (English translation On the Concept of Logical Consequence in Tarski (1956), pp. 409–420).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tarski, A. (1939). O ugruntowaniu naukowej semantyki. Przeglad Filosoficzny, 39, 50–57 (English translation The establishment of Scientific Semantics in Tarski (1956), pp. 401–408).

  23. Tarski, A. (1956). Logic, semantics, metamathematics. Oxford: Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Tennant, N. (2007). Existence and identity in free logic: a problem for inferentialism?’. Mind, 116, 1055–1078.

  25. van Fraassen, B. C. (1971). Formal semantics and logic. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaroslav Peregrin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Peregrin, J. Inferentializing Semantics. J Philos Logic 39, 255–274 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-010-9123-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-010-9123-9

Keywords

Navigation