PLURALISM IN LOGIC

@article{Field2009PLURALISMIL,
  title={PLURALISM IN LOGIC},
  author={Hartry Field},
  journal={The Review of Symbolic Logic},
  year={2009},
  volume={2},
  pages={342 - 359}
}
  • Hartry Field
  • Published 1 June 2009
  • Philosophy
  • The Review of Symbolic Logic
A number of people have proposed that we should be pluralists about logic, but there are several things this can mean. Are there versions of logical pluralism that are both high on the interest scale and also true? After discussing some forms of pluralism that seem either insufficiently interesting or quite unlikely to be true, the paper suggests a new form which might be both interesting and true; however, the scope of the pluralism that it allows logic is extremely narrow. 

The normative problem for logical pluralism

Abstract It is commonly thought that logic, whatever it may be, is normative. While accounting for the normativity of logic is a challenge for any view of logic, in this paper I argue that it is

Making sense of logical pluralism

Abstract The article is centered on the question of how best to understand the logical pluralism/logical monism debate. A number of suggestions are brought up and rejected on the ground that they

Logical Pluralism from a Pragmatic Perspective

ABSTRACTThis paper presents a new view of logical pluralism. This pluralism takes into account how the logical connectives shift, depending on the context in which they occur. Using the

Logical Pluralism from a Pragmatic Perspective

ABSTRACT This paper presents a new view of logical pluralism. This pluralism takes into account how the logical connectives shift, depending on the context in which they occur. Using the

A GUIDE TO LOGICAL PLURALISM FOR NON-LOGICIANS

There exists today an infinite variety (literally) of formal logics, different systems with incompatible properties. One way to explain the existence of many logics is to posit logical pluralism: to

The Collapse of Logical Pluralism has been Greatly Exaggerated

According to the logical pluralism of Beall and Restall, there are several distinct relations of logical consequence. Some critics argue that logical pluralism suffers from what I call the collapse

Double Trouble for Logical Pluralists

  • J. Evershed
  • Philosophy
    Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society
  • 2021
According to tradition, logic is normative for reasoning. According to many contemporary philosophers of logic, there is more than one correct logic. What is the relationship between these two

Beyond Logical Pluralism and Logical Monism

TLDR
This work reviews the possible forms of logical pluralism and renders them more plausible, and arrives at logical dynamism, a synthesis of various pluralisms and monism focused on how logic develops.

Disagreement about logic from a pluralist perspective

Logical pluralism is commonly described as the view that there is more than one correct logic. It has been claimed that, in order for that view to be interesting, there has to be at least a potential

Why logical pluralism?

TLDR
It is argued that the best motivation for logical pluralism will ultimately be rooted in certain kinds of performative data, and that the kind of evidence that would support logical pluralists should be drawn.
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 18 REFERENCES

What is the Normative Role of Logic

In making assertions one takes on commitments to the consistency of what one asserts and to the logical consequences of what one asserts. Although there is no quick link between belief and assertion,

Logical pluralism

Anyone acquainted with contemporary Logic knows that there are many so-called logics.1 But are these logics rightly so-called? Are any of the menagerie of non-classical logics, such as relevant

Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science

"Semantic incommensurability", i.e., non-translatabilityofconcepts taken from different theories, is at the focus of the argument. 1 attempt to give a rational reconstruction of the notion underlying

Is logic empirical

Paraconsistent logics

TLDR
This chapter discusses the need to derive reasonable inferences without deriving the trivial inferences that follow the ex falso quodlibet proof rule that holds in classical logic.

The Concept of Logical Consequence

Introduction 1. Representational semantics 2. Tarski on logical truth 3. Interpretational semantics 4. Interpreting quantifiers 5. Modality and consequence 6. The reduction principle 7. Substantive

Saving Truth From Paradox

Preface Introduction PART ONE: A SELECTIVE BACKGROUND 1. Chapter 1: Self-Reference and Tarski>'s Theorem 2. Validity and the Unprovability of Soundness 3. Kripke>'s Theory of Truth (Strong Kleene

Handbook of Philosophical Logic

TLDR
This paper presents a meta-mathematicalPrinciples of Deductive Systems: Foundations to Meta-mathematicics Murdoch J. Gabbay, with a focus on the role of formal semantics in the development of deterministic systems.

Informal Rigour and Completeness Proofs

Problems in the Philosophy of Mathematics

Written for teachers in training and liberal arts students taking a cultural mathematics course, this little book introduces the language and concepts of set theory and makes an introductory study of