Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T12:50:48.958Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HARMONIOUS RULES FOR IDENTITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2014

OWEN GRIFFITHS
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Logical inferentialists claim that the meanings of the logical constants are given by their inference rules. To rule out tonk-like expressions, it is often demanded that pairs of inference rules must be harmonious. The usual inference rules for the identity predicate are not harmonious, but most inferentialists want identity to be logical. Stephen Read has tried to formulate alternative, harmonious inference rules for identity. It will be proved, however, that his rules are precisely as strong as the old rules and that, because the old rules are not harmonious (as Read argues), nor are his. Further, it will be shown that no sound rules will be any improvement. Identity remains in need of satisfactory inferentialist treatment.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Symbolic Logic , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , September 2014 , pp. 499 - 510
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2014 

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

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brandom, R. (1994). Making it Explicit. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. (1973). Frege: Philosophy of Language. London, UK: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. (1991). The Logical Basis of Metaphysics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Francez, N., & Dyckhoff, R. (2010). Proof-theoretic semantics for a natural language fragment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 33, 447–477.Google Scholar
Gentzen, G. (1969). Unterschungen über das logische schliessen. In The Collected Papers of Gerhard Gentzen (Translated by Szabo, M.), pp. 68–131. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Kremer, M. (2007). Read on identity and harmony – a friendly correction and simplification. Analysis, 67, 157–159.Google Scholar
Milne, P. (2007). Existence, freedom, identity, and the logic of abstractionist realism. Mind, 116, 23–53.Google Scholar
Negri, S., & von Plato, J. (2001). Structural Proof Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, S. (1981). What is wrong with disjunctive syllogism? Analysis, 41, 66–70.Google Scholar
Read, S. (2004). Identity and harmony. Analysis, 64, 113–119.Google Scholar
Read, S. (2010). General elimination harmony and the meaning of the logical constants. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 39, 557–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Read, S. (2012). Identity and harmony revisited. Unpublished. Available at: http://www. st-andrews.ac.uk/∼ slr/identity_revisited.pdf.Google Scholar
Restall, G. (2012). Anti-realist classical logic and realist mathematics. In Rahman, S., editor. The Realism-Antirealism Debate in the Age of Alternative Logics. vol. 23, Logic, epistemology, and the unity of science, pp. 269–284.Google Scholar
Rumfitt, I. (2000). ‘Yes’ and ‘No’. Mind, 109, 781–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinberger, F. (2009). Not so stable. Analysis, 69, 655–661.Google Scholar
Steinberger, F. (2011). What harmony could and could not be. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 89, 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tennant, N. (1997). The Taming of the True. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar