Inferentialism and Quantification

Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 58 (1):107-113 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Logical inferentialists contend that the meanings of the logical constants are given by their inference rules. Not just any rules are acceptable, however: inferentialists should demand that inference rules must reflect reasoning in natural language. By this standard, I argue, the inferentialist treatment of quantification fails. In particular, the inference rules for the universal quantifier contain free variables, which find no answer in natural language. I consider the most plausible natural language correlate to free variables—the use of variables in the language of informal mathematics—and argue that it lends inferentialism no support.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,101

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-11-25

Downloads
91 (#243,830)

6 months
8 (#497,405)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Owen Griffiths
Cambridge University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Harmony and autonomy in classical logic.Stephen Read - 2000 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (2):123-154.
On the idea of a general proof theory.Dag Prawitz - 1974 - Synthese 27 (1-2):63 - 77.
Why Conclusions Should Remain Single.Florian Steinberger - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (3):333-355.

Add more references