Pluralism and Proofs

August 2014

“Pluralism and Proofs,” Erkenntnis 79:2 (2014) 279–291.

doi:10.1007/s10670-013-9477-9

Beall and Restall’s Logical Pluralism (2006) characterises pluralism about logical consequence in terms of the different ways cases can be selected in the analysis of logical consequence as preservation of truth over a class of cases. This is not the only way to understand or to motivate pluralism about logical consequence. Here, I will examine pluralism about logical consequence in terms of different standards of proof. We will focus on sequent derivations for classical logic, imposing two different restrictions on classical derivations to produce derivations focusr intuitionistic logic and for dual intuitionistic logic. The result is another way to understand the manner in which we can have different consequence relations in the same language. Furthermore, the proof-theoretic perspective gives us a different explanation of how the one concept of negation can have three different truth conditions, those in classical, intuitionistic and dual-intuitionistic models.

---

 download pdf

You are welcome to download and read this paper. I welcome any feedback you'd like to share. Please check the final published version if you wish to cite it. Thanks.

← Earlier / Archive / Later →