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
Revision history
Archival date: 2014-11-07
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2014-11-07

Total views
51 ( #28,682 of 38,049 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #34,223 of 38,049 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.