Logical and semantic purity
Protosociology 25:36-48 (2008)
Many mathematicians have sought ‘pure’ proofs of theorems. There are different takes on what a ‘pure’ proof is, though, and it’s important to be clear on their differences, because they can easily be conflated. In this paper I want to distinguish between two of them.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
On the Relationship Between Plane and Solid Geometry.Andrew Arana & Paolo Mancosu - 2012 - Review of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):294-353.
Proofs of the Compactness Theorem.Alexander Paseau - 2010 - History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (1):73-98.
Similar books and articles
The Idea of a Proof-Theoretic Semantics and the Meaning of the Logical Operations.Heinrich Wansing - 2000 - Studia Logica 64 (1):3-20.
The Myth of Semantic Structure.Jaroslav Peregrin - 2010 - In Piotr Stalmaszczyk (ed.), Philosophy of Language and Linguistics. Ontos Verlag. pp. 1.
On The Sense and Reference of A Logical Constant.Harold T. Hodes - 2004 - Philosophical Quarterly 54 (214):134-165.
Tidy Whitenes: A Genealogy of Race, Purity, and Hygiene.Dana Berthold - 2010 - Ethics and the Environment 15 (1):pp. 1-26.
Logical Pluralism and Semantic Information.Patrick Allo - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (6):659 - 694.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads34 ( #151,906 of 2,171,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,556 of 2,171,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?