Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T04:37:40.934Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Queries on Truth-Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2010

Hugues Leblanc
Hugues Leblanc
Affiliation:
Temple University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Studying some familiar truth-conditions, I shall detail the role they play in elementary logic and inquire into our grounds for holding them true. I shall discharge the first of these assignments with a good deal of assurance, but the second with far less; to my mind, (1) below mirrors our use of ‘and’, (6) our use of ‘every’, (8) our use of ‘necessarily’, etc. pretty accurately, but little evidence to that effect has ever been supplied, and — disturbingly enough — many take exception to the conditions under study.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , September 1975 , pp. 410 - 419
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1] Hintikka, J., “Surface Semantics: Definition and its Motivation,” in Truth, Syntax and Modality, Leblanc, H., ed., Amsterdam, 1973.Google Scholar
[2] Kripe, S., “A Completeness Theorem in Modal Logic,” The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 24 (1959), pp. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Kripke, S., “Semantical Analysis of Modal Logic I,” Zeitschrift für mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 9 (1963), pp. 67–96.Google Scholar
[4] Kripke, S., “Semantical Considerations on Modal Logic,” in Modal and Many-Valued Logics, Helsinki, 1963.Google Scholar
[5] Kripke, S., “Semantical Analysis of Intuitionistic Logic I,” in Formal Systems and Recursive Functions, J. N. Crosley and M. A. E. Dummett, Amsterdam, 1965.Google Scholar
[6] Leblanc, H. and Thomason, R. H., “The Demarcation Line between Intuitionist Logic and Classical Logic,” Zeitschrift fur Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 12 (1966), pp. 257–262.Google Scholar
[7] Quine, W. V., “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” The Philosophical Review, vol. 60 (1951), 20–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Quine, W. V., “Three Grades of Modal Involvement,” in Proceedings of the Xlth International Congress of Philosophy (Brussels, 1953), Amsterdam, 1953.Google Scholar
[9] Quine, W. V., Word and Object, New York and London, 1960.Google Scholar