Discussion

In Carlo Cellucci, Emily Grosholz & Emiliano Ippoliti (eds.), Logic and Knowledge. Cambridge Scholars Press. pp. 101-7 (2011)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Is a rational dispute over the validity of a fundamental logical law possible? In his lecture ‘Logics and Metalogics’, Timothy Williamson criticizes Dummett’s approach to this problem and maintains that a semantic theory does not provide a way of settling disputes over the validity of fundamental logical laws. I argue that Dummett’s view is different from the view criticized by Williamson. Dummett does not think that a semantic theory alone can settle a dispute over the validity of a fundamental logical law. Such disputes, according to Dummett, should be settled by the theory of meaning. A semantic theory in the sense that is usual among logicians is a theory of logical consequence . A meaning theory is a theory of understanding .
PhilPapers/Archive ID
COZD
Upload history
Archival date: 2014-11-07
View other versions
Added to PP index
2014-11-07

Total views
76 ( #37,670 of 51,431 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #51,424 of 51,431 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.