JC Beall and Greg Restall “Logical Pluralism”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 78:4 (2000) 475–493

doi:10.1080/00048400012349751

 download pdf

This is our article on logical pluralism. We argue that the notion of logical consequence doesn’t pin down one deductive consequence relation, but rather, there are many of them. In particular, we argue that broadly classical, intuitionistic and relevant accounts of deductive logic are genuine logical consequence relations. We should not search for One True Logic, since there are Many.

A bigger version of the argument (with much more detail) is found in our book of the same name.


Do you like this, or do you have a comment? Then please  share or reply on Twitter, or  email me.


← Defining Double Negation Elimination | Writing Archive | Defending Logical Pluralism →

about

I’m Greg Restall, and this is my personal website. I teach philosophy and logic as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Melbourne. ¶ Start at the home page of this site—a compendium of recent additions around here—and go from there to learn more about who I am and what I do. ¶ This is my personal site on the web. Nothing here is in any way endorsed by the University of Melbourne.

elsewhere

subscribe

To receive updates from this site, you can subscribe to the  RSS feed of all updates to the site in an RSS feed reader, or follow me on Twitter at  @consequently, where I’ll update you if anything is posted.

search