Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Validity Concepts in Proof-theoretic Semantics.Peter Schroeder-Heister - 2006 - Synthese 148 (3):525-571.
    The standard approach to what I call “proof-theoretic semantics”, which is mainly due to Dummett and Prawitz, attempts to give a semantics of proofs by defining what counts as a valid proof. After a discussion of the general aims of proof-theoretic semantics, this paper investigates in detail various notions of proof-theoretic validity and offers certain improvements of the definitions given by Prawitz. Particular emphasis is placed on the relationship between semantic validity concepts and validity concepts used in normalization theory. It (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   62 citations  
  • The philosophy of alternative logics.Andrew Aberdein & Stephen Read - 2009 - In Leila Haaparanta (ed.), The development of modern logic. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 613-723.
    This chapter focuses on alternative logics. It discusses a hierarchy of logical reform. It presents case studies that illustrate particular aspects of the logical revisionism discussed in the chapter. The first case study is of intuitionistic logic. The second case study turns to quantum logic, a system proposed on empirical grounds as a resolution of the antinomies of quantum mechanics. The third case study is concerned with systems of relevance logic, which have been the subject of an especially detailed reform (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Adventures of abstraction.Ignacio Angelelli - 2004 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 82 (1):11-35.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Context of Inference.Curtis Franks - 2018 - History and Philosophy of Logic 39 (4):365-395.
    There is an ambiguity in the concept of deductive validity that went unnoticed until the middle of the twentieth century. Sometimes an inference rule is called valid because its conclusion is a theorem whenever its premises are. But often something different is meant: The rule's conclusion follows from its premises even in the presence of other assumptions. In many logical environments, these two definitions pick out the same rules. But other environments are context-sensitive, and in these environments the second notion (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Steps Towards a Proof-Theoretical Semantics.Enrico Moriconi - 2012 - Topoi 31 (1):67-75.
    The aim of this paper is to reconsider several proposals that have been put forward in order to develop a Proof-Theoretical Semantics, from the by now classical neo-verificationist approach provided by D. Prawitz and M. Dummett in the Seventies, to an alternative, more recent approach mainly due to the work of P. Schroeder-Heister and L. Hallnäs, based on clausal definitions. Some other intermediate proposals are very briefly sketched. Particular attention will be given to the role played by the so-called Fundamental (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Generalized definitional reflection and the inversion principle.Peter Schroeder-Heister - 2007 - Logica Universalis 1 (2):355-376.
    . The term inversion principle goes back to Lorenzen who coined it in the early 1950s. It was later used by Prawitz and others to describe the symmetric relationship between introduction and elimination inferences in natural deduction, sometimes also called harmony. In dealing with the invertibility of rules of an arbitrary atomic production system, Lorenzen’s inversion principle has a much wider range than Prawitz’s adaptation to natural deduction. It is closely related to definitional reflection, which is a principle for reasoning (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Admissibility in Positive Logics.Alex Citkin - 2017 - Logica Universalis 11 (4):421-437.
    The paper studies admissibility of multiple-conclusion rules in positive logics. Using modification of a method employed by M. Wajsberg in the proof of the separation theorem, it is shown that the problem of admissibility of multiple-conclusion rules in the positive logics is equivalent to the problem of admissibility in intermediate logics defined by positive additional axioms. Moreover, a multiple-conclusion rule \ follows from a set of multiple-conclusion rules \ over a positive logic \ if and only if \ follows from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark