{"title":"毫无意义的分歧","authors":"D. Szmuc, T. M. Ferguson","doi":"10.1215/00294527-2021-0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article we revisit a number of disputes regarding significance logics—i.e., inferential frameworks capable of handling meaningless, although grammatical, sentences—that took place in a series of articles most of which appeared in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy between 1966 and 1978. These debates concern (i) the way in which logical consequence ought to be approached in the context of a significance logic, and (ii) the way in which the logical vocabulary has to be modified (either by restricting some notions, or by adding some vocabulary) to keep as much of Classical Logic as possible. Our aim is to show that the divisions arising from these disputes can be dissolved in the context of a novel and intuitive proposal that we put forward.","PeriodicalId":51259,"journal":{"name":"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meaningless Divisions\",\"authors\":\"D. Szmuc, T. M. Ferguson\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00294527-2021-0022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this article we revisit a number of disputes regarding significance logics—i.e., inferential frameworks capable of handling meaningless, although grammatical, sentences—that took place in a series of articles most of which appeared in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy between 1966 and 1978. These debates concern (i) the way in which logical consequence ought to be approached in the context of a significance logic, and (ii) the way in which the logical vocabulary has to be modified (either by restricting some notions, or by adding some vocabulary) to keep as much of Classical Logic as possible. Our aim is to show that the divisions arising from these disputes can be dissolved in the context of a novel and intuitive proposal that we put forward.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51259,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00294527-2021-0022\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"数学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LOGIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic","FirstCategoryId":"100","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00294527-2021-0022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LOGIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article we revisit a number of disputes regarding significance logics—i.e., inferential frameworks capable of handling meaningless, although grammatical, sentences—that took place in a series of articles most of which appeared in the Australasian Journal of Philosophy between 1966 and 1978. These debates concern (i) the way in which logical consequence ought to be approached in the context of a significance logic, and (ii) the way in which the logical vocabulary has to be modified (either by restricting some notions, or by adding some vocabulary) to keep as much of Classical Logic as possible. Our aim is to show that the divisions arising from these disputes can be dissolved in the context of a novel and intuitive proposal that we put forward.
期刊介绍:
The Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, founded in 1960, aims to publish high quality and original research papers in philosophical logic, mathematical logic, and related areas, including papers of compelling historical interest. The Journal is also willing to selectively publish expository articles on important current topics of interest as well as book reviews.