On epistemic and ontological interpretations of intuitionistic and paraconsistent paradigms

Logic Journal of the IGPL (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

From the technical point of view, philosophically neutral, the duality between a paraconsistent and a paracomplete logic lies in the fact that explosion does not hold in the former and excluded middle does not hold in the latter. From the point of view of the motivations for rejecting explosion and excluded middle, this duality can be interpreted either ontologically or epistemically. An ontological interpretation of intuitionistic logic is Brouwer’s idealism; of paraconsistency is dialetheism. The epistemic interpretation of intuitionistic logic is in terms of preservation of constructive proof; of paraconsistency is in terms of preservation of evidence. In this paper, we explain and defend the epistemic approach to paraconsistency. We argue that it is more plausible than dialetheism and allows a peaceful and fruitful coexistence with classical logic.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,745

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-12-11

Downloads
38 (#116,676)

6 months
16 (#899,032)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Walter Carnielli
University of Campinas
Abilio Rodrigues
Federal University of Minas Gerais

References found in this work

Logical pluralism.Jc Beall & Greg Restall - 2000 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 78 (4):475 – 493.
The paradox of the preface.David C. Makinson - 1965 - Analysis 25 (6):205-207.
``The Paradox of the Preface".D. C. Makinson - 1964 - Analysis 25 (6):205-207.
Dialetheism.Francesco Berto, Graham Priest & Zach Weber - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2018 (2018).

View all 20 references / Add more references