Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPassmann, Robert
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-10T12:48:07Z
dc.date.available2022-01-10T12:48:07Z
dc.date.issued2021-12
dc.date.submitted2021-05-21
dc.identifier.issn0039-7857
dc.identifier.others11229-021-03348-5
dc.identifier.other3348
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/332522
dc.descriptionFunder: studienstiftung des deutschen volkes; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004350
dc.descriptionFunder: Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds
dc.description.abstract<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>How many correct logics are there? Monists endorse that there is one, pluralists argue for many, and nihilists claim that there are none. Reasoning about these views requires a logic. That is the meta-logic. It turns out that there are some meta-logical challenges specifically for the pluralists. I will argue that these depend on an implicitly assumed absoluteness of correct logic. Pluralists can solve the challenges by giving up on this absoluteness and instead adopt contextualism about correct logic. This contextualism is naturalistically appealing.</jats:p>
dc.languageen
dc.publisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC
dc.subjectOriginal Research
dc.subjectLogical pluralism
dc.subjectCorrect logic
dc.subjectMeta-logic
dc.subjectContextualism
dc.subjectMeaning-variance
dc.subjectCoherence
dc.titleShould pluralists be pluralists about pluralism?
dc.typeArticle
dc.date.updated2022-01-10T12:48:06Z
prism.endingPage12682
prism.issueIdentifier5-6
prism.publicationNameSynthese
prism.startingPage12663
prism.volume199
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.79972
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-08-03
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1007/s11229-021-03348-5
rioxxterms.versionVoR
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.contributor.orcidPassmann, Robert [0000-0002-7170-3286]
dc.identifier.eissn1573-0964
cam.issuedOnline2021-08-10


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record