Abstract

In this paper I address the question 'How is knowledge of logical truths possible'. The sought-after explanation should be independent of what the true story about logical truth is. In particular, I try to account for the epistemic warrant that is conferred upon logical beliefs when they are neither inferred from other beliefs nor grounded on empirical evidence or testimony. The need for such an account is motivated by the apparent failure of the notions ofanalyticity on the one hand and intuition on the other in addressing the relevant question. I end up defending an account according to which warranted logical beliefs can be grounded on pure reasoning: they can be inferentially formed on the basis of pieces of suppositional reasoning.