2015-04-14
|
Contra Searle on Rules
|
|
I'm not a logician, but my two cents anyway:
There is Wittgenstein's Tractarian view which seems to deny any justificatory role to rules of logic, eg., 5.132.
You seem to be using "determine" in two different senses, first in the sense of identifying when arguments are valid, secondly in the sense of constituting validity. It's not clear to me how you move from the first sense to the second.
If I use the truth-table method to determine truth-preservingness or validity, do I need to know rules like modus ponens or disjunctive syllogism?
|