Switch to: References

Citations of:

Core Logic

Oxford, England: Oxford University Press (2017)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Routes to relevance: Philosophies of relevant logics.Shawn Standefer - 2024 - Philosophy Compass 19 (2):e12965.
    Relevant logics are a family of non-classical logics characterized by the behavior of their implication connectives. Unlike some other non-classical logics, such as intuitionistic logic, there are multiple philosophical views motivating relevant logics. Further, different views seem to motivate different logics. In this article, we survey five major views motivating the adoption of relevant logics: Use Criterion, sufficiency, meaning containment, theory construction, and truthmaking. We highlight the philosophical differences as well as the different logics they support. We end with some (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Variable-Sharing as Relevance.Shawn Standefer - 2024 - In Andrew Tedder, Shawn Standefer & Igor Sedlar (eds.), New Directions in Relevant Logic. Springer.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Recapture Results and Classical Logic.Camillo Fiore & Lucas Rosenblatt - 2023 - Mind 132 (527):762–788.
    An old and well-known objection to non-classical logics is that they are too weak; in particular, they cannot prove a number of important mathematical results. A promising strategy to deal with this objection consists in proving so-called recapture results. Roughly, these results show that classical logic can be used in mathematics and other unproblematic contexts. However, the strategy faces some potential problems. First, typical recapture results are formulated in a purely logical language, and do not generalize nicely to languages containing (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Actual Issues for Relevant Logics.Shawn Standefer - 2020 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 7.
    In this paper, I motivate the addition of an actuality operator to relevant logics. Straightforward ways of doing this are in tension with standard motivations for relevant logics, but I show how to add the operator in a way that permits one to maintain the intuitions behind relevant logics. I close by exploring some of the philosophical consequences of the addition.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Logical Predictivism.Ben Martin & Ole Hjortland - 2020 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 50 (2):285-318.
    Motivated by weaknesses with traditional accounts of logical epistemology, considerable attention has been paid recently to the view, known as anti-exceptionalism about logic, that the subject matter and epistemology of logic may not be so different from that of the recognised sciences. One of the most prevalent claims made by advocates of AEL is that theory choice within logic is significantly similar to that within the sciences. This connection with scientific methodology highlights a considerable challenge for the anti-exceptionalist, as two (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  • A plea for KR.Alison Duncan Kerr - 2019 - Synthese 198 (4):3047-3071.
    There is a strong case to be made for thinking that an obscure logic, KR, is better than classical logic and better than any relevant logic. The argument for KR over relevant logics is that KR counts disjunctive syllogism valid, and this is the biggest complaint about relevant logics. The argument for KR over classical logic depends on the normativity of logic and the paradoxes of implication. The paradoxes of implication are taken by relevant logicians to justify relevant logic, but (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Self-Effacement Gambit.Jack Woods - 2019 - Res Philosophica 96 (2):113-139.
    Philosophical arguments usually are and nearly always should be abductive. Across many areas, philosophers are starting to recognize that often the best we can do in theorizing some phenomena is put forward our best overall account of it, warts and all. This is especially true in esoteric areas like logic, aesthetics, mathematics, and morality where the data to be explained is often based in our stubborn intuitions. -/- While this methodological shift is welcome, it's not without problems. Abductive arguments involve (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Identity of Proofs and the Criterion for Admissible Reductions.Seungrak Choi - 2021 - Korean Journal of Logic 3 (24):245-280.
    Dag Prawitz (1971) put forward the idea that an admissible reduction process does not affect the identity of proofs represented by derivations in natural deduction. The idea relies on his conjecture that two derivations represent the same proof if and only if they are equivalent in the sense that they are reflexive, transitive and symmetric closure of the immediate reducibility relation. Schroeder-Heister and Tranchini (2017) accept Prawitz’s conjecture and propose the triviality test as the criterion for admissible reductions. In the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Proof-Theoretic Semantics.Peter Schroeder-Heister - forthcoming - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   64 citations  
  • Restall’s Proof-Theoretic Pluralism and Relevance Logic.Teresa Kouri - 2016 - Erkenntnis 81 (6):1243-1252.
    Restall :279–291, 2014) proposes a new, proof-theoretic, logical pluralism. This is in contrast to the model-theoretic pluralism he and Beall proposed in Beall and Restall :475–493, 2000) and in Beall and Restall. What I will show is that Restall has not described the conditions on being admissible to the proof-theoretic logical pluralism in such a way that relevance logic is one of the admissible logics. Though relevance logic is not hard to add formally, one critical component of Restall’s pluralism is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • (1 other version)The original sin of proof-theoretic semantics.Francesco Paoli & Bogdan Dicher - 2018 - Synthese 198 (1):615-640.
    Proof-theoretic semantics is an alternative to model-theoretic semantics. It aims at explaining the meaning of the logical constants in terms of the inference rules that govern their behaviour in proofs. We argue that this must be construed as the task of explaining these meanings relative to a logic, i.e., to a consequence relation. Alas, there is no agreed set of properties that a relation must have in order to qualify as a consequence relation. Moreover, the association of a consequence relation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • On Proof-Theoretic Approaches to the Paradoxes: Problems of Undergeneration and Overgeneration in the Prawitz-Tennant Analysis.Seungrak Choi - 2019 - Dissertation, Korea University
    In this dissertation, we shall investigate whether Tennant's criterion for paradoxicality(TCP) can be a correct criterion for genuine paradoxes and whether the requirement of a normal derivation(RND) can be a proof-theoretic solution to the paradoxes. Tennant’s criterion has two types of counterexamples. The one is a case which raises the problem of overgeneration that TCP makes a paradoxical derivation non-paradoxical. The other is one which generates the problem of undergeneration that TCP renders a non-paradoxical derivation paradoxical. Chapter 2 deals with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)The original sin of proof-theoretic semantics.Bogdan Dicher & Francesco Paoli - 2020 - Synthese:1-26.
    Proof-theoretic semantics is an alternative to model-theoretic semantics. It aims at explaining the meaning of the logical constants in terms of the inference rules that govern their behaviour in proofs. We argue that this must be construed as the task of explaining these meanings relative to a logic, i.e., to a consequence relation. Alas, there is no agreed set of properties that a relation must have in order to qualify as a consequence relation. Moreover, the association of a consequence relation (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • (1 other version)Relevance logic.Edwin Mares - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  • The nature of entailment: an informational approach.Yaroslav Shramko & Heinrich Wansing - 2019 - Synthese 198 (S22):5241-5261.
    In this paper we elaborate a conception of entailment based on what we call the Ackermann principle, which explicates valid entailment through a logical connection between sentences depending on their informational content. We reconstruct Dunn’s informational semantics for entailment on the basis of Restall’s approach, with assertion and denial as two independent speech acts, by introducing the notion of a ‘position description’. We show how the machinery of position descriptions can effectively be used to define the positive and the negative (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation