Defining Rules, Proofs and Counterexamples

August 3, 2018

Abstract: In this talk, I will present an account of defining rules, with the aim of explaining these rules they play a central role in analytic proofs. Along the way, I’ll explain how Kreisel’s squeezing argument helps us understand the connection between an informal notion of validity and the notions formalised in our accounts of proofs and models, and the relationship between proof-theoretic and model- theoretic analyses of logical consequence.

This is a talk for the VII Workshop on Philosophical Logic.
The slides for the talk are available here, and the handout is here.

about

I’m Greg Restall, and this is my personal website. ¶ I am the Shelby Cullom Davis Professor of Philosophy at the University of St Andrews, and the Director of the Arché Philosophical Research Centre for Logic, Language, Metaphysics and Epistemology ¶ I like thinking about – and helping other people think about – logic and philosophy and the many different ways they can inform each other.

To receive updates from this site, subscribe to the RSS feed in your feed reader. Alternatively, follow me at @consequently@hcommons.social, where most updates are posted.

contact

Social media: @consequently@scholar.social.
Personal email: greg@consequently.org.
St Andrews profile.
My office is in Edgecliffe, The Scores.