Countering Justification Holism in the Epistemology of Logic: The Argument from Pre-Theoretic Universality

Australasian Journal of Logic 20 (3):375-396 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A key question in the philosophy of logic is how we have epistemic justification for claims about logical entailment (assuming we have such justification at all). Justification holism asserts that claims of logical entailment can only be justified in the context of an entire logical theory, e.g., classical, intuitionistic, paraconsistent, paracomplete etc. According to holism, claims of logical entailment cannot be atomistically justified as isolated statements, independently of theory choice. At present there is a developing interest in—and endorsement of—justification holism due to the revival of an abductivist approach to the epistemology of logic. This paper presents an argument against holism by establishing a foundational entailment-sentence of deduction which is justified independently of theory choice and outside the context of a whole logical theory.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-05-16

Downloads
965 (#19,185)

6 months
244 (#9,848)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Frederik J. Andersen
University of Copenhagen

Citations of this work

Logical Disagreement.Frederik J. Andersen - 2024 - Dissertation, University of St. Andrews

Add more citations

References found in this work

Writing the Book of the World.Theodore Sider - 2011 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge and its limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Philosophical explanations.Robert Nozick - 1981 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The Philosophy of Philosophy.Timothy Williamson - 2007 - Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Epistemology and cognition.Alvin I. Goldman - 1986 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

View all 81 references / Add more references