Manifest Invalidity: Neil Tennant's New Argument for Intuitionism

Synthese 134 (3):353-362 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

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.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

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
2016-02-26

Downloads
26 (#524,350)

6 months
2 (#668,348)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jon Cogburn
Louisiana State University

Citations of this work

The logic of logical revision formalizing Dummett's argument.Jon Cogburn - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (1):15 – 32.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references