Synthese 191 (15):3473-3500 (2014)

Elia Zardini
Universidade de Lisboa
Some apparently valid arguments crucially rely on context change. To take a kind of example first discussed by Frege, ‘Tomorrow, it’ll be sunny’ taken on a day seems to entail ‘Today, it’s sunny’ taken on the next day, but the first sentence taken on a day sadly does not seem to entail the second sentence taken on the second next day. Mid-argument context change has not been accounted for by the tradition that has extensively studied the distinctive logical properties of context-dependent languages, for that tradition has focussed on arguments whose premises and conclusions are taken at the same context. I first argue for the desiderability of having a logic that accounts for mid-argument context change and I explain how one can informally understand such context change in a standard framework in which the relation of logical consequence holds among sentences. I then propose a family of simple temporal “intercontextual” logics that adequately model the validity of certain arguments in which the context changes. In particular, such logics validate the apparently valid argument in the Fregean example. The logics lack many traditional structural properties (reflexivity, contraction, commutativity etc.) as a consequence of the logical significance acquired by the sequence structure of premises and conclusions. The logics are however strong enough to capture in the form of logical truths all the valid arguments of both classical logic and Kaplan-style “intracontextual” logic. Finally, I extend the framework by introducing new operations into the object language, such as intercontextual conjunction, disjunction and implication, which, contrary to intracontextual conjunction, disjunction and implication, perfectly match the metalinguistic, intercontextual notions of premise combination, conclusion combination and logical consequence by representing their respective two operands as taken at different contexts
Keywords Context change  Context dependence  Logical consequence   Logical-consequence bearers  Substructural logics  Temporal conjunction   Tense logic
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-014-0490-6
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: 56,081
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

Demonstratives: An Essay on the Semantics, Logic, Metaphysics and Epistemology of Demonstratives and Other Indexicals.David Kaplan - 1989 - In Joseph Almog, John Perry & Howard Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 481-563.
Afterthoughts.David Kaplan - 1989 - In J. Almog, J. Perry & H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes From Kaplan. Oxford University Press. pp. 565-614.
Dynamic Predicate Logic.Jeroen Groenendijk & Martin Stokhof - 1991 - Linguistics and Philosophy 14 (1):39-100.
Truth Without Contra(di)Ction.Elia Zardini - 2011 - Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (4):498-535.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Naive Truth and Naive Logical Properties.Elia Zardini - 2014 - Review of Symbolic Logic 7 (2):351-384.
The Logic of Indexicals.Alexandru Radulescu - 2015 - Synthese 192 (6):1839-1860.
The Opacity of Truth.Elia Zardini - 2015 - Topoi 34 (1):37-54.
What Counts as Evidence for a Logical Theory?Ole Thomassen Hjortland - 2019 - Australasian Journal of Logic 16 (7):250.
Token-Reflexivity and Repetition.Alexandru Radulescu - 2018 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 5:745-763.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Aggregation and Idempotence.Lloyd Humberstone - 2013 - Review of Symbolic Logic 6 (4):680-708.
Logical Consequence and the Paradoxes.Edwin Mares & Francesco Paoli - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):439-469.
Logical Consecutions in Discrete Linear Temporal Logic.V. V. Rybakov - 2005 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 70 (4):1137 - 1149.
Tarski on Logical Consequence.Mario Gómez-Torrente - 1996 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37 (1):125-151.
Defending Logical Pluralism.J. C. Beall & Greg Restall - 2001 - In Logical Consequence: Rival Approaches. Stanmore: Hermes. pp. 1-22.
Reinflating Logical Consequence.Owen Griffiths - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic (1):1-9.
What Logical Pluralism Cannot Be.Rosanna Keefe - 2014 - Synthese 191 (7):1375-1390.
Logical Pluralism.Jc Beall & Greg Restall - 2000 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 78 (4):475 – 493.
Ray on Tarski on Logical Consequence.William H. Hanson - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (6):605-616.


Added to PP index

Total views
51 ( #194,246 of 2,403,827 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #360,323 of 2,403,827 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes