What Isn’t Obvious about ‘obvious’: A Data-driven Approach to Philosophy of Logic

In Andrew Aberdein & Matthew Inglis (eds.), Advances in Experimental Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics. London: Bloomsbury Press. pp. 201-224 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
It is often said that ‘every logical truth is obvious’ (Quine 1970: 82), that the ‘axioms and rules of logic are true in an obvious way’ (Murawski 2014: 87), or that ‘logic is a theory of the obvious’ (Sher 1999: 207). In this chapter, I set out to test empirically how the idea that logic is obvious is reflected in the scholarly work of logicians and philosophers of logic. My approach is data-driven. That is to say, I propose that systematically searching for patterns of usage in databases of scholarly works, such as JSTOR, can provide new insights into the ways in which the idea that logic is obvious is reflected in logical and philosophical practice, i.e., in the arguments that logicians and philosophers of logic actually make in their published work.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-01-08
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
152 ( #26,186 of 50,067 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
35 ( #18,122 of 50,067 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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