The Concept of Logical Consequence

Philosophical Review 106 (3):365-409 (1997)

Abstract
In the first section, I consider what several logicians say informally about the notion of logical consequence. There is significant variation among these accounts, they are sometimes poorly explained, and some of them are clearly at odds with the usual technical definition. In the second section, I first argue that a certain kind of informal account—one that includes elements of necessity, generality, and apriority—is approximately correct. Next I refine this account and consider several important questions about it, including the appropriate characterization of necessity, the criterion for selecting logical constants, and the exact role of apriority. I argue, among other things, that there is no need to recognize a special logical sense of necessity and that the selection of terms to serve as logical constants is ultimately a pragmatic matter. In the third section, I consider whether the informal account I have presented and defended is adequately represented by the usual technical definition. I show that it is, and provably so, for certain limited ways of selecting logical constants. In the general case, however, there seems to be no way to be sure that the technical and informal accounts coincide.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy  General Interest
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0031-8108
DOI phr1997106328
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 48,902
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Inexpressibility of Validity.Julien Murzi - 2014 - Analysis 74 (1):65-81.
Invariance and Logicality in Perspective.Gila Sher - forthcoming - In Gil Sagi & Jack Woods (eds.), The Semantic Conception of Logic: Essays on Consequence, Invariance, and Meaning. Cambridge, Britain: Cambridge University Press.
Reflections on Consequence.John Etchemendy - 2008 - In Douglas Patterson (ed.), New Essays on Tarski and Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 263--299.

View all 25 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ray on Tarski on Logical Consequence.William H. Hanson - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (6):605-616.
Logical Consequence: Its Nature, Structure, and Application.Colin R. Caret & Ole T. Hjortland - 2015 - In Colin R. Caret & Ole T. Hjortland (eds.), Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford University Press.
What is Tarski's Common Concept of Consequence?Ignacio Jané - 2006 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 12 (1):1-42.
The Concept of Logical Consequence.Michael Detlefsen - 1993 - Philosophical Books 34 (1):1-10.
Reinflating Logical Consequence.Owen Griffiths - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic (1):1-9.
Tarski on Logical Consequence.Mario Gómez-Torrente - 1996 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37 (1):125-151.
Logical Consequence and Natural Language.Michael Glanzberg - 2015 - In Colin Caret & Ole Hjortland (eds.), Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford University Press. pp. 71-120.
Prospects for a Cognitive Norm Account of Logical Consequence.Thomas N. P. A. Brouwer - 2015 - In Pavel Arazim & Michal Danzak (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2014. College Publications. pp. 1-19.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-02-17

Total views
8 ( #891,956 of 2,309,723 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #104,333 of 2,309,723 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes

Sign in to use this feature