Switch to: References

Citations of:

On formal aspects of the epistemic approach to paraconsistency

In Max Freund, Max Fernandez de Castro & Marco Ruffino (eds.), Logic and Philosophy of Logic: Recent Trends in Latin America and Spain. London: College Publications. pp. 48-74 (2018)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Models & Proofs: LFIs Without a Canonical Interpretations.Eduardo Alejandro Barrio - 2018 - Principia: An International Journal of Epistemology 22 (1):87-112.
    In different papers, Carnielli, W. & Rodrigues, A., Carnielli, W. Coniglio, M. & Rodrigues, A. and Rodrigues & Carnielli, present two logics motivated by the idea of capturing contradictions as conflicting evidence. The first logic is called BLE and the second—that is a conservative extension of BLE—is named LETJ. Roughly, BLE and LETJ are two non-classical logics in which the Laws of Explosion and Excluded Middle are not admissible. LETJ is built on top of BLE. Moreover, LETJ is a Logic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • The Evidence Approach to Paraconsistency Versus the Paraconsistent Approach to Evidence.Jonas Rafael Becker Arenhart - 2020 - Synthese 198 (12):11537-11559.
    In this paper, we analyze the epistemic approach to paraconsistency. This approach is advanced as an alternative to dialetheism on what concerns interpreting paraconsistency and contradictions; instead of having to accept that there are true contradictions, it is suggested that we may understand such situations as involving only conflicting evidence, which restricts contradictions to a notion of evidence weaker than truth. In this paper, we first distinguish two conflicting programs entangled in the proposal: interpreting paraconsistency in general through the notion (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations