Synthese 134 (3):353 - 362 (2003)
In Chapter 7 of The Taming of the True, Neil Tennant provides a new argument from Michael Dummett's ``manifestation requirement'' to the incorrectness of classical logic and the correctness of intuitionistic logic. I show that Tennant's new argument is only valid if one interprets crucial existence claims occurring in the proof in the manner of intuitionists. If one interprets the existence claims as a classical logician would, then one can accept Tennant's premises while rejecting his conclusion of logical revision. Thus, Tennant has provided no evidence that should convince anyone who is not already an intuitionist. Since his proof is a proof for the correctness of intuitionism, it begs the question.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Metaphysics Philosophy of Language|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Wrestling with (and Without) Dialetheism.Josh Parsons & Jon Cogburn - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (1):87 – 102.
Existence, Freedom, Identity, and the Logic of Abstractionist Realism.Peter Milne - 2007 - Mind 116 (461):23-53.
Analogues of Knowability.David DeVidi & Tim Kenyon - 2003 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (4):481 – 495.
The Logic of Logical Revision Formalizing Dummett's Argument.Jon Cogburn - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (1):15 – 32.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #185,467 of 2,153,858 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #90,536 of 2,153,858 )
How can I increase my downloads?