Abstract
AbstractDebates about logical consequence are typically motivated by the desire to capture ‘the intuitive concept of logical consequence’. The authors of One True Logic believe that there is a mistake here from the start. There is no single, well-behaved target for our precise definitions of logical consequence but rather a historical tangle of intuitions such as formality, necessity, and normativity. The chapter explores this history, and these features in particular, in order to get a clearer view of the target. A number of notable figures in the history of logic are considered: Philo, Bolzano, Quine, and especially Tarski, who receives extensive discussion.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
