View topic on PhilPapers for more information
Related categories

16 found
Order:
More results on PhilPapers
  1. Independent Alternatives: Ross's Puzzle and Free Choice.Richard Jefferson Booth - forthcoming - Philosophical Studies:1-33.
    Orthodox semantics for natural language modals give rise to two puzzles for their interactions with disjunction: Ross’s puzzle and the puzzle of free choice permission. It is widely assumed that each puzzle can be explained in terms of the licensing of ‘Diversity’ inferences: from the truth of a possibility or necessity modal with an embedded disjunction, hearers infer that each disjunct is compatible with the relevant set of worlds. I argue that Diversity inferences are too weak to explain the full (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. The Genealogy of ‘∨’.Landon D. C. Elkind & Richard Zach - forthcoming - Review of Symbolic Logic.
    The use of the symbol ∨ for disjunction in formal logic is ubiquitous. Where did it come from? The paper details the evolution of the symbol ∨ in its historical and logical context. Some sources say that disjunction in its use as connecting propositions or formulas was introduced by Peano; others suggest that it originated as an abbreviation of the Latin word for “or”, vel. We show that the origin of the symbol ∨ for disjunction can be traced to Whitehead (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. A Two-Dimensional Logic for Two Paradoxes of Deontic Modality.Fusco Melissa & Kocurek Alexander - forthcoming - Review of Symbolic Logic.
    In this paper, we axiomatize the deontic logic in Fusco 2015, which uses a Stalnaker-inspired account of diagonal acceptance and a two-dimensional account of disjunction to treat Ross’s Paradox and the Puzzle of Free Choice Permission. On this account, disjunction-involving validities are a priori rather than necessary. We show how to axiomatize two-dimensional disjunction so that the introduction/elimination rules for boolean disjunction can be viewed as one-dimensional projections of more general two-dimensional rules. These completeness results help make explicit the restrictions (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Categoricity and Negation. A Note on Kripke’s Affirmativism.Constantin C. Brîncuș & Iulian D. Toader - 2019 - In The Logica Yearbook 2018. London: College Publications. pp. 57-66.
    We argue that, if taken seriously, Kripke's view that a language for science can dispense with a negation operator is to be rejected. Part of the argument is a proof that positive logic, i.e., classical propositional logic without negation, is not categorical.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Choice Points for a Modal Theory of Disjunction.Fabrizio Cariani - 2017 - Topoi 36 (1):171-181.
    This paper investigates the prospects for a semantic theory that treats disjunction as a modal operator. Potential motivation for such a theory comes from the way in which modals embed within disjunctions. After reviewing some of the relevant data, I go on to distinguish a variety of modal theories of disjunction. I analyze these theories by considering pairs of conflicting desiderata, highlighting some of the tradeoffs they must face.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6. Against the Unrestricted Applicability of Disjunction Elimination.Marcel Jahn - 2017 - Rerum Causae 9 (2):92-111.
    In this paper, I argue that the disjunction elimination rule presupposes the principle that a true disjunction contains at least one true disjunct. However, in some contexts such as supervaluationism or quantum logic, we have good reasons to reject this principle. Hence, disjunction elimination is restricted in at least one respect: it is not applicable to disjunctions for which this principle does not hold. The insight that disjunction elimination presupposes the principle that a true disjunction contains at least one true (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Conjunction and Disjunction in Infectious Logics.Hitoshi Omori & Damian Szmuc - 2017 - In Alexandru Baltag, Jeremy Seligman & Tomoyuki Yamada (eds.), Logic, Rationality, and Interaction (LORI 2017, Sapporo, Japan). Berlin: Springer. pp. 268-283.
    In this paper we discuss the extent to which conjunction and disjunction can be rightfully regarded as such, in the context of infectious logics. Infectious logics are peculiar many-valued logics whose underlying algebra has an absorbing or infectious element, which is assigned to a compound formula whenever it is assigned to one of its components. To discuss these matters, we review the philosophical motivations for infectious logics due to Bochvar, Halldén, Fitting, Ferguson and Beall, noticing that none of them discusses (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  8. Expressing Permission.William B. Starr - 2016 - Semantics and Linguistic Theory 26:325-349.
    This paper proposes a semantics for free choice permission that explains both the non-classical behavior of modals and disjunction in sentences used to grant permission, and their classical behavior under negation. It also explains why permissions can expire when new information comes in and why free choice arises even when modals scope under disjunction. On the proposed approach, deontic modals update preference orderings, and connectives operate on these updates rather than propositions. The success of this approach stems from its capacity (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  9. Can Questions Be Directly Disjoined? (2015).Anna Szabolcsi - 2015 - CLS Invited Talk.
    Observe that complement questions can be either directly or indirectly conjoined, but they can only be indirectly disjoined. • What theories of questions and coordination predict this difference? • Look at Partition theory (Groenendijk & Stokhof 1984) and Inquisitive Semantics (Groenendijk & Roelofsen 2009, Ciardelli et al. 2012).
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10. What Do Quantifier Particles Do?Anna Szabolcsi - 2015 - Linguistics and Philosophy 38 (2):159-204.
    In many languages, the same particles that form quantifier words also serve as connectives, additive and scalar particles, question markers, roots of existential verbs, and so on. Do these have a unified semantics, or do they merely bear a family resemblance? Are they aided by silent operators in their varied roles―if yes, what operators? I dub the particles “quantifier particles” and refer to them generically with capitalized versions of the Japanese morphemes. I argue that both MO and KA can be (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  11. Failures of Categoricity and Compositionality for Intuitionistic Disjunction.Jack Woods - 2012 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (4):281-291.
    I show that the model-theoretic meaning that can be read off the natural deduction rules for disjunction fails to have certain desirable properties. I use this result to argue against a modest form of inferentialism which uses natural deduction rules to fix model-theoretic truth-conditions for logical connectives.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  12. Logic for Dogs.Andrew Aberdein - 2008 - In Steven D. Hales (ed.), What Philosophy Can Tell You About Your Dog. Open Court. pp. 167-181.
    Imagine a dog tracing a scent to a crossroads, sniffing all but one of the exits, and then proceeding down the last without further examination. According to Sextus Empiricus, Chrysippus argued that the dog effectively employs disjunctive syllogism, concluding that since the quarry left no trace on the other paths, it must have taken the last. The story has been retold many times, with at least four different morals: (1) dogs use logic, so they are as clever as humans; (2) (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  13. Hungarian Disjunctions and Positive Polarity.Anna Szabolcsi - 2002 - In Istvan Kenesei & Peter Siptar (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian, Vol. 8. Univ. of Szeged.
    The de Morgan laws characterize how negation, conjunction, and disjunction interact with each other. They are fundamental in any semantics that bases itself on the propositional calculus/Boolean algebra. This paper is primarily concerned with the second law. In English, its validity is easy to demonstrate using linguistic examples. Consider the following: (3) Why is it so cold in here? We didn’t close the door or the window. The second sentence is ambiguous. It may mean that I suppose we did not (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  14. Exclusive Disjunction and the Biconditional: An Even-Odd Relationship.Joseph S. Fulda - 1993 - Mathematics Magazine 66 (2):124.
    Proves two simple identities relating the biconditional and exclusive disjunction. -/- The PDF has been made available gratis by the publisher.
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. Coordination and Comparatives.Friederike Moltmann - 1992 - Dissertation, MIT
    Remove from this list   Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  16. Direct Vs. Indirect Disjunction of Wh-Complements, as Diagnosed by Subordinating Complementizers (2016).Anna Szabolcsi - manuscript
    Since the early 1980s, there has been a debate in the semantics literature pertaining to whether wh-interrogatives can be directly disjoined, as main clauses and as complements. Those who held that the direct disjunction of wh-interrogatives was in conflict with certain theoretical considerations proposed that they could be disjoined indirectly. Indirect disjunction proceeds by first lifting both wh-interrogatives and then disjoining them; it assigns matrix-level scope to OR. As we will see, the notorious theoretical need for indirect disjunction has disappeared (...)
    Remove from this list   Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations