关于FDE“All the Way Up”的注释

IF 0.6 3区 数学 Q2 LOGIC Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic Pub Date : 2020-05-01 DOI:10.1215/00294527-2020-0007
J. Beall, Caleb Camrud
{"title":"关于FDE“All the Way Up”的注释","authors":"J. Beall, Caleb Camrud","doi":"10.1215/00294527-2020-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a natural ‘combinatorial argument’ for the philosophical view that if the standard (socalled classical) account of logical consequence (henceforth, logic) is right about logic’s fundamental truth values (viz., The True and The False), then FDE, a well-known subclassical logic [1, 2, 6, 8], is a more natural account of the space of ‘logical possibility’. Without officially endorsing that argument, our aim in this note is to defend it from an otherwise powerful objection. Our defense rests on an explicit generalization of a result by Priest [11]. In particular, by way of answering the target objection, we explicitly show that after combining the standard (classical) values in {>,⊥} to get a space of four values, as FDE demands, the given process of combining values ‘all the way up’ to α many values, for any ordinal α, results in the same account of logical consequence (viz., FDE).","PeriodicalId":51259,"journal":{"name":"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic","volume":"13 1","pages":"283-296"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Note on FDE \\\"All the Way Up\\\"\",\"authors\":\"J. Beall, Caleb Camrud\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/00294527-2020-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is a natural ‘combinatorial argument’ for the philosophical view that if the standard (socalled classical) account of logical consequence (henceforth, logic) is right about logic’s fundamental truth values (viz., The True and The False), then FDE, a well-known subclassical logic [1, 2, 6, 8], is a more natural account of the space of ‘logical possibility’. Without officially endorsing that argument, our aim in this note is to defend it from an otherwise powerful objection. Our defense rests on an explicit generalization of a result by Priest [11]. In particular, by way of answering the target objection, we explicitly show that after combining the standard (classical) values in {>,⊥} to get a space of four values, as FDE demands, the given process of combining values ‘all the way up’ to α many values, for any ordinal α, results in the same account of logical consequence (viz., FDE).\",\"PeriodicalId\":51259,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"283-296\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"100\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/00294527-2020-0007\",\"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/10.1215/00294527-2020-0007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"数学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LOGIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

对于哲学观点,有一个自然的“组合论证”,即如果逻辑结果的标准(所谓的经典)解释(因此称为逻辑)对逻辑的基本真值(即真和假)是正确的,那么FDE,一个著名的亚经典逻辑[1,2,6,8],是对“逻辑可能性”空间的更自然的解释。在没有正式认可这一论点的情况下,我们在这篇文章中的目的是为它辩护,以免遭到另一种强有力的反对。我们的辩护基于Priest[11]对结果的明确概括。特别是,通过回答目标反对意见的方式,我们明确地表明,在将{>,⊥}中的标准(经典)值组合成一个由四个值组成的空间之后,正如FDE所要求的那样,对于任何序数α,将值“一直向上”组合到α多个值的给定过程都会产生相同的逻辑结果(即FDE)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Note on FDE "All the Way Up"
There is a natural ‘combinatorial argument’ for the philosophical view that if the standard (socalled classical) account of logical consequence (henceforth, logic) is right about logic’s fundamental truth values (viz., The True and The False), then FDE, a well-known subclassical logic [1, 2, 6, 8], is a more natural account of the space of ‘logical possibility’. Without officially endorsing that argument, our aim in this note is to defend it from an otherwise powerful objection. Our defense rests on an explicit generalization of a result by Priest [11]. In particular, by way of answering the target objection, we explicitly show that after combining the standard (classical) values in {>,⊥} to get a space of four values, as FDE demands, the given process of combining values ‘all the way up’ to α many values, for any ordinal α, results in the same account of logical consequence (viz., FDE).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
14
审稿时长
>12 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
An Invitation to Extension Domination Substitutional Validity for Modal Logic Weak Kleene and Other Weak Logics of Conditionals Lower Bounds of Sets of P-points Definability of Boolean Functions in Kripke Semantics
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1