What are Beall and Restall pluralists about?

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 82 (3):409 – 420 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper I argue that Beall and Restall's claim that there is one true logic of metaphysical modality is incompatible with the formulation of logical pluralism that they give. I investigate various ways of reconciling their pluralism with this claim, but conclude that none of the options can be made to work.

Similar books and articles

Review of J.C. Beall and Greg Restall, Logical Pluralism. [REVIEW]J. A. Burgess - 2010 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81 (2):519-522.
Logical Pluralism, Meaning-Variance, and Verbal Disputes.Ole Thomassen Hjortland - 2013 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (2):355-373.
Logical pluralism.Jc Beall & Greg Restall - 2000 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 78 (4):475 – 493.
Logical Pluralism.Jc Beall & Greg Restall - 2005 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Edited by Greg Restall.
Logical pluralism and semantic information.Patrick Allo - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (6):659 - 694.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
589 (#28,810)

6 months
66 (#65,516)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nicole Wyatt
University of Calgary

References found in this work

Ought there to be but One Logic.Michael Resnik - 1996 - In B. Jack Copeland (ed.), Logic and Reality: Essays on the Legacy of Arthur Prior. Oxford University Press. pp. 489--517.
What exactly is logical pluralism?G. C. Goddu - 2002 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80 (2):218 – 230.

Add more references