Authors
Abstract
Intuitions play a significant role in debates about logic. In this paper, I analyze how legitimate is that practice. In the first part of the paper, I distinguish between theoretical and pretheoretical intuitions, and argue that some pretheoretical intuitions are not to be taken into account in logic. Particularly, our pretheoretical intuitions about the concept of validity are not of much importance, since we don’t have a uniform or clear concept of validity in the natural language to be elucidated. Nevertheless, I argue that, since logical connectives are more homogeneously used in our ordinary speech, we can appeal to pretheoretical intuitions to establish their meaning in a logical theory. In the second part of the paper, I consider and reply to four objections to this moderate proposal. Two of them try to show that, if this position is adopted, then the pretheoretical intuitions about the connectives are completely unreliable and useless. One of them argues that this mixed position is unstable: pretheoretical intuitions about the connectives are also pretheoretical intuitions about validity. The last problem is related to the definition of validity and the possibility of revising it.
Keywords consecuencia lógica  constantes lógicas  epistemology of logic  epistemología de la lógica  intuiciones  intuitions  logical consequence  logical constants
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.22370/rhv2020iss16pp239-253
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,355
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Intuitions in logic: a moderate proposal.Diego Tajer - 2020 - Humanities Journal of Valparaiso 16:239-253.
Strong Connexivity.Andreas Kapsner - 2012 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):141-145.
Noisy Vs. Merely Equivocal Logics.Patrick Allo - 2013 - In Francesco Berto, Edwin Mares, Koji Tanaka & Francesco Paoli (eds.), Paraconsistency: Logic and Applications. Springer. pp. 57--79.
Logical Constants.J. A. Chadwick - 1927 - Mind 36 (141):1-11.
Logical Constants.K. Warmbrod - 1999 - Mind 108 (431):503 - 538.
Logical Constants.K. WarmbrÕ & D. - 1999 - Mind 108 (431):503-538.
Do Philosophical Intuitions Need Calibration?Marko Jurjako - 2015/2016 - Anthropology and Philosophy 12:73-84.
A Defense of Intuitions.S. Matthew Liao - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 140 (2):247 - 262.
Intuitions and Conceptual Analysis in Wittgensteinian Pragmatism.David Hommen & Frauke Albersmeier - 2019 - History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 22 (1):72-91.
Linguistic Intuitions Revisited.Michael Devitt - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):833-865.
Seemingly Semantic Intuitions.Kent Bach - 2002 - In Joseph K. Campbell, Michael O'Rourke & David Shier (eds.), Meaning and Truth: Investigations in Philosophical Semantics. Seven Bridges Press. pp. 21--33.
Formal and Informal Consequence.Owen Griffiths - 2014 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 3 (1):9-20.
X-Phi Without Intuitions?Herman Cappelen - 2014 - In Anthony Robert Booth & Darrell P. Rowbottom (eds.), Intuitions. Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-01-27

Total views
5 ( #1,207,781 of 2,519,597 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #406,756 of 2,519,597 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes