Studia Logica 100 (4):855-877 (2012)

Authors
Abstract
In a previous paper (see ‘Tolerant, Classical, Strict’, henceforth TCS) we investigated a semantic framework to deal with the idea that vague predicates are tolerant, namely that small changes do not affect the applicability of a vague predicate even if large changes do. Our approach there rests on two main ideas. First, given a classical extension of a predicate, we can define a strict and a tolerant extension depending on an indifference relation associated to that predicate. Second, we can use these notions of satisfaction to define mixed consequence relations that capture non-transitive tolerant reasoning. Although we gave some empirical motivation for the use of strict and tolerant extensions, making use of them commits us to the view that sentences of the form ‘ p∨¬p ’ and ‘ p∧¬p ’ are not automatically valid or unsatisfiable, respectively. Some philosophers might take this commitment as a negative outcome of our previous proposal. We think, however, that the general ideas underlying our previous approach to vagueness can be implemented in a variety of ways. This paper explores the possibility of defining mixed notions of consequence in the more classical super/sub-valuationist setting and examines to what extent any of these notions captures non-transitive tolerant reasoning.
Keywords Logical Consequence  Vagueness  Tolerance  Super- and Sub-valuationism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11225-012-9422-y
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,226
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Vagueness, Truth and Logic.Kit Fine - 1975 - Synthese 30 (3-4):265-300.
Tolerant, Classical, Strict.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):347-385.
An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic.Graham Priest - 2001 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 12 (2):294-295.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Logics of Strict-Tolerant Logic.Eduardo Barrio, Lucas Rosenblatt & Diego Tajer - 2015 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 44 (5):551-571.
Metainferential Duality.Bruno Da Ré, Federico Pailos, Damian Szmuc & Paula Teijeiro - 2020 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 30 (4):312-334.

View all 13 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Tolerant, Classical, Strict.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):347-385.
Vagueness, Truth and Permissive Consequence.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2015 - In Kentaro Fujimoto, José Martínez Fernández, Henri Galinon & Theodora Achourioti (eds.), Unifying the Philosophy of Truth. Springer Verlag. pp. 409-430.
Tolerance.Kimberley Jane Pryor - 2008 - Marshall Cavendish Benchmark.
A Model of Tolerance.Elia Zardini - 2008 - Studia Logica 90 (3):337-368.
Vagueness as Closeness.Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (2):157 – 183.
Vagueness and Central Gaps.Peter Pagin - 2010 - In Richard Dietz & Sebastiano Moruzzi (eds.), Cuts and Clouds: Vaguenesss, its Nature and its Logic. Oxford University Press.
Vagueness: A Minimal Theory.Patrick Greenough - 2003 - Mind 112 (446):235-281.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-08-08

Total views
76 ( #150,526 of 2,499,690 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,206 of 2,499,690 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes