On What There Must Be: Existence in Logic and Some Related Riddles

Disputatio 4 (34):889-910 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is part of an old folklore that logic should not have existential theo- rems or existential validities. One should not prove in pure logic the existence of anything whatsoever; nothing could be proved by means of logic alone to necessarily exist. Whatever exists might not exist. This standpoint has been expressed by several philosophers from different traditions, such as Hume, Kant, Orenstein and Quine. We now set the stage by examining some issues. Our main question is: “Do we actually have existential theorems in logic?” Two possible attitudes towards this question are as follows. A desideratum: logic should not have any existential theorems. A fact: logic does not have any existential theorems.

Author Profiles

Edward Haeusler
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-07-06

Downloads
187 (#91,465)

6 months
79 (#72,883)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?