Do we tolerate inconsistencies?

Dialectica 47 (1):27-35 (1993)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

SummaryIt is not the inconsistency in the sense of classical logic that we have to tolerate. The dialectical reasoning, described by N. Rescher, is outside the domain where CI is defined. The apparent contradiction between CI and paraconsistent logic can be removed by realizing that PL is a widening of the conceptual framework of classical logic. In this new framework the meaning of some words was changed similarly as, according to N. Bohr, in quantum mechanics the words “particle” and “wave” have changed their meaning

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,503

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Paraconsistency Everywhere.Greg Restall - 2002 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 43 (3):147-156.
Sources of, and exploiting, inconsistency: preliminary report.Don Perlis - 1997 - Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 7 (1-2):13-24.
Complementary explanations.Max Urchs - 1999 - Synthese 120 (1):137-149.
Why Tolerate Religion?Brian Leiter - 2012 - Princeton University Press.
World models and inconsistencies.Erik Weber & Wim Christiaens - 1998 - Foundations of Science 3 (2):285-311.
Why Tolerate Religion?By Brian Leiter.Philip Devine - 2013 - Analysis 73 (3):595-597.
Should we tolerate people who split?Simon Beck - 1992 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 30 (1):1-17.
The Ethics of Religious Toleration.Desmond M. Clarke - 2013 - Jurisprudence 4 (1):151-157.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-21

Downloads
11 (#1,129,170)

6 months
1 (#1,472,167)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references