“Proof Theory and Meaning: the context of deducibility,” p. 204–219 in Logic Colloquium 2007, ed. F. Delon, U. Kohlenbach, P. Maddy and F. Stephan, Cambridge University Press, 2010.

 download pdf

I examine Belnap’s two criteria of existence and uniqueness for evaluating putative definitions of logical concepts in inference rules, by determining how they apply in four different examples: conjunction, the universal quantifier, the indefinite choice operator and the necessity in the modal logic S5. This illustrates the ways that definitions may be evaluated relative to a background theory of consequence, and the ways that different accounts of consequence provide us with different resources for making definitions.

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

← Barriers to Consequence | Writing Archive | Decorated Linear Order Types and the Theory of Concatenation →


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.



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.