How to Classify Varieties of Consequence

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985955%3A_____%2F24%3A00599079" target="_blank" >RIV/67985955:_____/24:00599079 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52411-0_7" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52411-0_7</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-52411-0_7" target="_blank" >10.1007/978-3-031-52411-0_7</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

How to Classify Varieties of Consequence

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Göran Sundholm is well-known for his insistence that logic, to be pursued properly, requires a rich conceptual framework that in current logical theories is often, unfortunately, encountered in an essentially impoverished form. One of the conceptual distinctions he has been constantly urging is that between the various senses of consequence. I agree that logic needs a rich conceptual framework, and that especially with respect to consequence many crucial distinctions must be maintained. However, these for me are not quite the same as those urged by Göran (at least not obviously so), and in this paper I explain which I think the distinctions should be and why they are crucial. This, I hope, may lead to comparing notes with Göran, which, I believe, may yield some interesting results.

Název v anglickém jazyce

How to Classify Varieties of Consequence

Popis výsledku anglicky

Göran Sundholm is well-known for his insistence that logic, to be pursued properly, requires a rich conceptual framework that in current logical theories is often, unfortunately, encountered in an essentially impoverished form. One of the conceptual distinctions he has been constantly urging is that between the various senses of consequence. I agree that logic needs a rich conceptual framework, and that especially with respect to consequence many crucial distinctions must be maintained. However, these for me are not quite the same as those urged by Göran (at least not obviously so), and in this paper I explain which I think the distinctions should be and why they are crucial. This, I hope, may lead to comparing notes with Göran, which, I believe, may yield some interesting results.

Druh

C - Kapitola v odborné knize

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA20-18675S" target="_blank" >GA20-18675S: Povaha logických forem a moderní logika</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název knihy nebo sborníku

The Architecture and Archaeology of Modern Logic. Studies Dedicated to Göran Sundholm

ISBN

978-3-031-52410-3

Počet stran výsledku

14

Strana od-do

115-128

Počet stran knihy

510

Název nakladatele

Springer

Místo vydání

Cham

Kód UT WoS kapitoly

—