Logic and Substance A Reply to Fogelin

Abstract

systematically more important By casting his discussion in terms of connecting links between premises and a conclusion, it may seem that the issues are all purely logical. As he knows, some of them are and some of them are not. The decision whether to accept or reject a counter-example, e.g., Thomson's, is extra-logical. More to the point, decisions concerning what comparisons are relevant or what cases are to be considered like cases are also extra-logical. Sidgwick's Principle of Justice and its descendant, Schwartz's Sufficient Generality Test, are impotent unless backed by substantive principles that specify their domain of application. When they seem to generate substantive conclusions, we can be sure that other principles are at work, and we have a right to know what they are. When these substantive principles are simply slipped past us in the guise of a canon of logical criticism, we can say that the principle of Logical Neutrality has been violated.