{"title":"Jared Warren: Shadows of Syntax: Revitalizing Logical and Mathematical Conventionalism","authors":"J. Peregrin","doi":"10.31577/orgf.2022.29107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I must start this review non-traditionally, with an apology. As the author of the book remarks (p. 120. footnote 47), “Peregrin (2017) ... cites my (2015), but seems to indicate that I reject unrestricted inferentialism, despite the paper actually being an extensive defense of unrestricted inferentialism.” This, unfortunately, is true. The relevant note in my text was mutilated during my revision of the text based on the proofreading of a native speaker. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. However, what Warren now writes in his book makes me think that we might perhaps call it quits. Warren, despite knowing about my work, including my Inferentialism book (which he refers to in his book), does not shy away from claiming that he is the only current defender of unrestricted inferentialism. Part I of the book has two chapters. In the first, Warren distinguishes his version of conventionalism from some other versions, reaching the twin characterizations:","PeriodicalId":43025,"journal":{"name":"Organon F","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organon F","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2022.29107","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Abstract
I must start this review non-traditionally, with an apology. As the author of the book remarks (p. 120. footnote 47), “Peregrin (2017) ... cites my (2015), but seems to indicate that I reject unrestricted inferentialism, despite the paper actually being an extensive defense of unrestricted inferentialism.” This, unfortunately, is true. The relevant note in my text was mutilated during my revision of the text based on the proofreading of a native speaker. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. However, what Warren now writes in his book makes me think that we might perhaps call it quits. Warren, despite knowing about my work, including my Inferentialism book (which he refers to in his book), does not shy away from claiming that he is the only current defender of unrestricted inferentialism. Part I of the book has two chapters. In the first, Warren distinguishes his version of conventionalism from some other versions, reaching the twin characterizations:
期刊介绍：
Organon F publishes high-quality articles on the entire range of topics discussed in contemporary analytic philosophy. Accordingly, we invite authors to submit articles that address issues that belong, but are not limited, to philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, epistemology, metaphysics and philosophical logic. We also consider analytically written articles on ethics, aesthetics, social philosophy, political philosophy and history of philosophy. The principal aim is to publish original articles that meet the standards typical of analytic philosophy, primarily those of conceptual clarity, precision and soundness of argumentation.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
