Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-hb754 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-02-24T20:59:23.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2023

Erik Stei
Affiliation:
Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackermann, Wilhelm (1956): Begründung einer strengen Implikation. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 21(2): 113128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allo, Patrick (2015): Synonymy and Intra-Theoretical Pluralism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 93(1): 7791.Google Scholar
Anderson, Alan Ross & Belnap, Nuel D. (1975): Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity, volume 1. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Balcerak, Brendan (2014): Verbal Disputes and Substantiveness. Erkenntnis, 79(31): 3154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrio, Eduardo Alejandro, Pailos, Federico & Szmuc, Damian (2021): Substructural Logics, Pluralism and Collapse. Synthese, 198(supplement issue 20), 49915007.Google Scholar
Beall, Jc (2017): There Is No Logical Negation: True, False, Both and Neither. Australasian Journal of Logic, 14(1): 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beall, Jc & Restall, Greg (2000): Logical Pluralism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 78(4): 475493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beall, Jc & Restall, Greg (2001): Defending Logical Pluralism. In: Woods, John & Brown, Bryson (eds.) Logical Consequence: Rival Approaches Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the Society of Exact Philosophy. Stanmore: Hermes, 122.Google Scholar
Beall, Jc & Restall, Greg (2006): Logical Pluralism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Blake-Turner, Christopher (2021): Reasons Basing and the Normative Collapse of Logical Pluralism. Philosophical Studies, 178(12): 40994118.Google Scholar
Blake-Turner, Christopher & Russell, Gillian (2021): Logical Pluralism without the Normativity. Synthese, 198(supplement issue 20): 48594877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bochen´ski, Jozef Maria (1956): A Precis of Mathematical Logic. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Boghossian, Paul (2000): Knowledge of Logic. In: Boghossian, Paul & Peacocke, Christopher (eds.) New Essays on the a Priori. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 229254.Google Scholar
Brown, Jessica (2013): Experimental Philosophy, Contextualism and SSI. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 86(2): 233261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckwalter, Wesley (2010): Knowledge Isn’t Closed on Saturday: A Study in Ordinary Language. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 1(3): 395406.Google Scholar
Bueno, Otávio & Shalkowski, Scott A. (2009): Modalism and Logical Pluralism. Mind, 118(470): 295321.Google Scholar
Burgess, J. A. (2010): Review of JC Beall and Greg Restall, Logical Pluralism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 81(2): 519522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelen, Herman & Hawthorne, John (2009): Relativism and Monadic Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Caret, Collin (2017): The Collapse of Logical Pluralism Has Been Greatly Exaggerated. Erkenntnis, 82(4): 739760.Google Scholar
Caret, Collin (2021): Why Logical Pluralism? Synthese, 198(supplement issue 20): 49474968.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1937): Logical Syntax of Language. Reprint (2001), London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1956): Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology. In: Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic, 2nd edition. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 205221.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1957): Foundations of Logic and Mathematics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1962): Logical Foundations of Probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnielli, Walter & Coniglio, Marcelo Esteban (2020): Combining Logics. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, fall 2020 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/logic-combining/.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David (2011): Verbal Disputes. Philosophical Review, 120(4): 515566.Google Scholar
Cobreros, Pablo et al. (2012): Tolerant, Classical, Strict. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 41(2): 346385.Google Scholar
Cobreros, Pablo et al. (2013): Reaching Transparent Truth. Mind, 122(488): 841866.Google Scholar
Cohnitz, Daniel & Estrada-González, Luis (2019): An Introduction to the Philosophy of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cook, Roy T. (2010): Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom: A Tour of Logical Pluralism. Philosophy Compass, 5/6: 492502.Google Scholar
Cook, Roy T. (2014): Should Anti-Realists Be Anti-Realists about Anti-Realism. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 2): 233258.Google Scholar
Cook, Roy T. (2018): Pluralism about Pluralisms. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding, & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 365386.Google Scholar
Cotnoir, Aaron (2018): Logical Nihilism. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding, & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 301329.Google Scholar
Creath, Robert (1987): The Initial Reception of Carnap’s Doctrine of Analyticity. Noûs, 21(4): 477499.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald (1973): Radical Interpretation. Dialectica, 27(3/4): 313328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De, Michael (2011): Negation in Context. PhD thesis, University of St Andrews.Google Scholar
DeRose, Keith (2005): The Ordinary Language Basis for Contextualism, and the New Invariantism. The Philosophical Quarterly, 55(219): 170198.Google Scholar
DeVidi, David (2011): The Municipal By-Laws of Thought. In: DeVidi, David, Hallett, Michael, & Clark, Peter (eds.) Logic, Mathematics, Philosophy: Vintage Enthusiasms. Essays in Honour of John L. Bell. Dordrecht: Springer, 97112.Google Scholar
Dicher, Bogdan (2016): A Proof-Theoretic Defence of Meaning-Invariant Logical Pluralism. Mind, 125(499): 727757.Google Scholar
Dicher, Bogdan (2020): Variations on Intra-Theoretical Logical Pluralism: Internal versus External Consequence. Philosophical Studies, 177: 667686.Google Scholar
Dicher, Bogdan (2021): Requiem for Logical Nihilism, or: Logical Nihilism Annihilated. Synthese, 198(8), 70737096.Google Scholar
Dicher, Bogdan & Paoli, Francesco (2021): The Originial Sin of Proof-Theoretic Semantics. Synthese, 198(1): 615640.Google Scholar
Dummett, Michael (1983): The Philosophical Basis of Intuitionist Logic. In: Benacerraf, Paul & Putnam, Hilary (eds.) Philosophy of Mathematics. Selected Readings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 215247.Google Scholar
Dummett, Michael (1996): Realism and Anti-Realism. In: The Seas of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 462478.Google Scholar
Edwards, Douglas (2018): The Metaphysics of Truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eklund, Matti (2012): The Multitude View on Logic. In: Restall, Greg & Russell, Gillian (eds.) New Waves in Philosophical Logic. Palgrave MacMillan, 217240.Google Scholar
Enoch, David & Schechter, Joshua (2008): How Are Basic Belief-Forming Methods Justified? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 76(3): 547579.Google Scholar
Estrada-González, Luis (2011): On the Meaning of Connectives (Apropos of a Non-Necessitarianist Challenge). Logica Universalis, 5(1): 115126.Google Scholar
Etchemendy, John (1988): Tarski on Truth and Logical Consequence. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 53(1): 5179.Google Scholar
Etchemendy, John (1990): The Concept of Logical Consequence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Fariñas del Cerro, Luis & Herzig, Andreas (1996): Combining Classical and Intuitionistic Logic. Or: Intuitionistic Implication as a Conditional. In: Baader, F. & Schulz, K. U. (eds.) Frontiers of Combining Systems, Applied Logic Series, volume 3. Springer, 93102.Google Scholar
Ferrari, Filippo & Moruzzi, Sebastiano (2019): Ecumenical Alethic Pluralism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 49(3): 368393.Google Scholar
Ferrari, Filippo & Moruzzi, Sebastiano (2020): Logical pluralism, indeterminacy and the normativity of logic. Inquiry, 63(3/4): 323346.Google Scholar
Ferrari, Filippo & Orlandelli, Eugenio (2021): Proof-Theoretic Pluralism. Synthese, 198: 48794903.Google Scholar
Field, Hartry (2009): Pluralism in Logic. Review of Symbolic Logic, 2(2): 342359.Google Scholar
Field, Hartry (2015): What Is Logical Validity? In: Hjortland, Ole Thomassen & Caret, Collin (eds.) Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3370.Google Scholar
Fjellstad, Andreas (2021): Logical Nihilism and the Logic of ‘Prem’. Logic and Logical Philosophy, 30(2): 311325.Google Scholar
Franks, Curtis (2014): Logical Nihilism. In: Rush, Penelope (ed.) The Metaphysics of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 109127.Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob (1879): Begriffsschrift. Eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle: Verlag von Louis Nebert.Google Scholar
Gentzen, Gerhard (1935): Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen I. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39(1): 176210.Google Scholar
Glanzberg, Michael (2015): Logical Consequence and Natural Language. In: Caret, Collin & Hjortland, Ole Thomassen (eds.) Foundations of Logical Consequence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 71120.Google Scholar
Grice, H. Paul (1989): Further Notes on Logic and Conversation. In: Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 4157.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Owen (2013): Problems for Logical Pluralism. History and Philosophy of Logic, 34(2): 170182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haack, Susan (1974): Deviant Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haack, Susan (1976): The Justification of Deduction. Mind, 85(337): 112119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haack, Susan (1978): Philosophy of Logics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Harman, Gilbert (1984): Logic and Reasoning. Synthese, 60(1): 107127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, John H. (1982): What’s So Logical about the “Logical” Axioms? Studia Logica, 41: 159171.Google Scholar
Heyting, Arend (1956): Intuitionism: An Introduction. Amsterdam: NorthHolland.Google Scholar
Hjortland, Ole Thomassen (2013): Logical Pluralism, Meaning-Variance, and Verbal Disputes. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 91(2): 355373.Google Scholar
Hjortland, Ole Thomassen (2014): Verbal Disputes in Logic: against Minimalism for Logical Connectives. Logique & Analyse, 57(227): 463486.Google Scholar
Hjortland, Ole Thomassen (2017): Anti-Exceptionalism about Logic. Philosophical Studies, 174: 631658.Google Scholar
Hjortland, Ole Thomassen (2022): Disagreement about Logic. Inquiry, 65(6): 660682.Google Scholar
Hlobil, Ulf (2021): Limits of Abductivism about Logic. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 103(2): 320340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humberstone, Lloyd (1979): Interval Semantics for Tense Logic: Some Remarks. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8(1): 171196.Google Scholar
Humberstone, Lloyd (2000): Contra-Classical Logics. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 78(4): 438474.Google Scholar
Humberstone, Lloyd (2009): Logical Pluralism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 87(1): 162168.Google Scholar
Humberstone, Lloyd (2011): The Connectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Iemhoff, Rosalie (2020): Intuitionism in the Philosophy of Mathematics. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Fall 2020 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/intuitionism/.Google Scholar
Jenkins, C. S. I. (2014): Merely Verbal Disputes. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 1): 1130.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David (1989a): Afterthoughts. In: Almog, Joseph/ Perry, John & Wettstein, Howard (eds.) Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 565614.Google Scholar
Kaplan, David (1989b): Demonstratives. In: Almog, Joseph, Perry, John & Wettstein, Howard (eds.) Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 481563.Google Scholar
Keefe, Rosanna (2014): What Logical Pluralism Cannot Be. Synthese, 191(7): 13751390.Google Scholar
Keefe, Rosanna (2018): Pluralism: Logic, Truth and Domain-Specificity. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding, & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 429452.Google Scholar
Kelly, Thomas (2003): Epistemic Rationality as Instrumental Rationality: A Critique. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 66(3): 612640.Google Scholar
King, Jeffrey C. (2003): Tense, Modality, and Semantic Values. In: Hawthorne, John & Zimmermann, Dean (eds.) Philosophical Perspectives 17: Language and Philosophical Linguistics. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 195245.Google Scholar
Knobe, Joshua & Nichols, Shaun (2017): Experimental Philosophy. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Winter 2017 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/experimental-philosophy/.Google Scholar
Kissel, Kouri, Teresa (2018): Logical Pluralism from a Pragmatic Perspective. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 96: 57891.Google Scholar
Kissel, Kouri, Teresa (2021): Metalinguistic Negotiation and Logical Pluralism. Synthese, 198(Suppl. 20): 48014812.Google Scholar
Kissel, Kouri, Teresa & Shapiro, Stewart (2020): Logical Pluralism and Normativity. Inquiry, 63(3–4): 389410.Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika (1977): What “Must” and “Can” Must and Can Mean. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1(3): 337355.Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul A. (1977): Speaker’s Reference and Semantic Reference. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 2(1): 255276.Google Scholar
Lakatos, Imre (1976): Proofs and Refutations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Leitgeb, Hannes & Carus, André (2020): Rudolf Carnap. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Spring 2020 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/spr2020/entries/carnap/.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (1979): Scorekeeping in a Language Game. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 8(3): 339359.Google Scholar
Lewis, David (1981): Index, Context, and Content. In: Kanger, Stig & Öhman, Sven (eds.) Philosophy and Grammar. Dordrecht: D. Reidel, 79100.Google Scholar
Lynch, Michael P. (2009): Truth as One and Many. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2000): What Does It Mean to Say That Logic Is Formal? PhD thesis, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2004): In What Sense (if any) Is Logic Normative for Thought? https://johnmacfarlane.net/normativity_of_logic.pdf.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2009): Nonindexical Contextualism. Synthese, 166(2): 231250.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2014): Assessment Sensitivity. Relative Truth and Its Applications. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John (2017): Logical Constants. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Winter 2017 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/ win2017/entries/logical-constants/.Google Scholar
Maddy, Penelope (2002): A Naturalistic Look at Logic. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 76(2): 6190.Google Scholar
Makinson, David (2014): Relevance Logic as a Conservative Extension of Classical Logic. In: Hansen, Sven Ove (ed.) David Makinson on Classical Methods for Non-Classical Problems. Dordrecht: Springer, 383398.Google Scholar
Mares, Edwin (2020): Relevance Logic. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Winter 2020 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/ entries/logic-relevance/.Google Scholar
Marques, Teresa (2014): Doxastic Disagreement. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 1): 121142.Google Scholar
McHugh, Conor (2012): The Truth Norm of Belief. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 93(1): 830.Google Scholar
Montague, Richard (1974): Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mortensen, Chris (1989): Anything Is possible. Erkenntnis, 30(3): 319337.Google Scholar
Moschovakis, Joan (2021): Intuitionistic Logic. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Fall 2021 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ logic-intuitionistic/.Google Scholar
Olinder, Ragnar Francén (2012): Rescuing Doxastic Normativism. Theoria, 78: 293308.Google Scholar
Paoli, Francesco (2002): Substructural Logics: A Primer, Trends in Logic, volume 13. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Paoli, Francesco (2003): Quine and Slater on Paraconsistency and Deviance. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 32(5): 531548.Google Scholar
Payette, Gillman & Wyatt, Nicole (2018): Logical Particularism. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding, & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 277299.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding (2006): What Can the Problem of Mixed Inferences Teach Us about Alethic Pluralism? The Monist, 89(1): 102117.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding (2014): Pluralism x 3: Truth, Logic, Metaphysics. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 2): 259277.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding (2020): On Moderate Pluralism about Truth and Logic. The Philosophical Forum, 51(2): 143160.Google Scholar
Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding & Kim, Seahwa (2018): Strong Truth Pluralism. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 107130.Google Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry, Elio, Renée & Hanson, Philip (2008): Is Logic All in Our Heads? Studia Logica, 88(1): 366.Google Scholar
Plunkett, David & Sundell, Tim (2013): Disagreement and the Semantics of Normative and Evaluative Terms. Philosophers’ Imprint, 13(23): 137.Google Scholar
Prawitz, Dag (1974): On the Idea of a General Proof Theory. Synthese, 27(1–2): 6377.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2001): Logic: One or Many. In: Woods, John & Brown, Bryson (eds.) Logical Consequence: Rival Approaches Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the Society of Exact Philosophy. Stanmore: Hermes, 2328.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2006a): Doubt Truth to Be a Liar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2006b): In Contradiction. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2008): An Introduction to Non Classical Logic. From If to Is. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, Graham (2014): Revising Logic. In: Rush, Penelope (ed.) The Metaphysics of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 211223.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2016): Logical Disputes and the a Priori. Logique & Analyse, 59(236): 347366.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2021a): Logical Abductivism and Non-deductive Inference. Synthese, 199(1–2): 32073217.Google Scholar
Priest, Graham (2021b): A Note on Mathematical Pluralism and Logical Pluralism. Synthese, 198(supplement issue 20): 49374946.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary (1962): The Analytic and the Synthetic. Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, III: 358397.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1964): Word and Object. Harvard: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1966): Truth by Convention. In: The Ways of Paradox and Other Essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 7799.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. (1986): Philosophy of Logic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2nd edition.Google Scholar
Rabern, Brian (2013): Monsters in Kaplan’s Logic of Demonstratives. Philosophical Studies, 164(2): 393404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, Sayeeda & Redmond, Juan (2008): Hugh MacColl and the Birth of Logical Pluralism. In: Gabbay, Dov & Woods, John (eds.) The Handbook of the History of Logic, volume 4. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 533604.Google Scholar
Read, Stephen (2006): Monism: The One True Logic. In: DeVidi, David & Kenyon, Tim (eds.) A Logical Approach to Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Graham Solomon. Dordrecht: Springer, 193209.Google Scholar
Restall, Greg (2002): Carnap’s Tolerance, Meaning, and Logical Pluralism. The Journal of Philosophy, 99(8): 426443.Google Scholar
Restall, Greg (2005): Multiple Conclusions. In: Hájek, Petr, Valdés-Villanueva, Luis & Westerståhl, Dag (eds.) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. College Publications.Google Scholar
Restall, Greg (2014): Pluralism and Proofs. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 2): 279291.Google Scholar
Richard, Mark (2004): Contextualism and Relativism. Philosophical Studies, 119(1–2): 215242.Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige (2012): Information Structure in Discourse: Towards an Integrated Formal Theory of Pragmatics. Semantics & Pragmatics, 5(6): 169.Google Scholar
Rush, Penelope (2014): Logical Realism. In: Rush, Penelope (ed.) The Metaphysics of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1331.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2008): One True Logic? Journal of Philosophical Logic, 37(6): 593611.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2014): Metaphysical Analyticity and the Epistemology of Logic. Philosophical Studies, 171(1): 161175.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2017): An Introduction to Logical Nihilism. In: Leitgeb, Hannes et al. (eds.) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Congress. London: College Publications, 125134.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2018): Logical Nihilism: Could There Be no Logic? Philosophical Issues, 28(1): 308324.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2019a): Deviance and Vice: Strength As a Theoretical Virtue in the Epistemology of Logic. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 99(3): 548563.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2019b): Logical Pluralism. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, spring 2019 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/ entries/logical-pluralism/.Google Scholar
Russell, Gillian (2020): Logic Isn’t Normative. Inquiry, 63(3/4): 371388.Google Scholar
Sagi, Gil (2018): Logicality and Meaning. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 11(1): 133159.Google Scholar
Scambler, Chris (2020): Transfinite Meta-inferences. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 49(6): 10791089.Google Scholar
Schechter, Joshua (2011): Juxtaposition: A New Way to Combine Logics. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 4(4): 560606.Google Scholar
Schechter, Joshua & Enoch, David (2006): Meaning and Justification: The Case of Modus Ponens. Noûs, 40(4): 687715.Google Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe (2003): A Plea for Monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26(1): 29120.Google Scholar
Schroeder-Heister, Peter (2018): Proof-Theoretic Semantics. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, spring 2018 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/ spr2018/entries/proof-theoretic-semantics/.Google Scholar
Sennet, Adam (2021): Ambiguity. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Fall 2021 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/ambiguity/.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart (2006): Vagueness in Context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart (2014a): Pluralism, Relativism, and Objectivity. In: Rush, Penelope (ed.) The Metaphysics of Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 4971.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart (2014b): Varieties of Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart & Lynch, Michael P. (2021): Does Logical Pluralism Imply, or Suggest, Truth Pluralism, or Vice Versa? Synthese, 198(Suppl. 20): 49254936.Google Scholar
Sher, Gila (1996): Did Tarski Commit ‘Tarski’s Fallacy’? The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 61(2): 653686.Google Scholar
Shoesmith, D. J. & Smiley, Timothy John (1978): Multiple-Conclusion Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sider, Theodore (2011): Writing the Book of the World. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert (1999): Assertion. In: Context and Content. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 7895.Google Scholar
Stei, Erik (2016): Epistemic Standards: High Hopes and Low Expectations. In: Grajner, Martin & Schmechtig, Pedro (eds.) Epistemic Reasons, Norms and Goals. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter, 185199.Google Scholar
Stei, Erik (2020a): Disagreement about Logic from a Pluralist Perspective. Philosophical Studies, 177(11): 33293350.Google Scholar
Stei, Erik (2020b): Non-Normative Logical Pluralism and the Revenge of the Normativity Objection. The Philosophical Quarterly, 70(278): 162177.Google Scholar
Stei, Erik (2020c): Rivalry Normativity and the Collapse of Logical Pluralism. Inquiry, 63(3/4): 411432.Google Scholar
Steinberger, Florian (2019): Three Ways in Which Logic Might Be Normative. Journal of Philosophy, 116(1): 531.Google Scholar
Steinberger, Florian (2016): How Tolerant Can You Be? Carnap on Rationality. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, XCII(3): 645668.Google Scholar
Steinberger, Florian (2017): The Normative Status of Logic. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Spring 2017 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/ archives/spr2017/entries/logic-normative/.Google Scholar
Steinberger, Florian (2019): Logical Pluralism and Logical Normativity. Philosophers’ Imprint, 19(12): 119.Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. (1950): On Referring. Mind, 59(235): 320344.Google Scholar
Tahko, Tuomas E. (2021): A Survey of Logical Realism. Synthese, 198(5): 47754790.Google Scholar
Tajer, Diego (2022): The Normative Autonomy of Logic. Erkenntnis, 87(6): 26612684.Google Scholar
Tappolet, Christine (1997): Mixed Inferences: A Problem for Pluralism about Truth Predicates. Analysis, 57(3): 209210.Google Scholar
Tarski, Alfred (1936): Über den Begriff der logischen Folgerung. In: Actes du Congrès International de Philosophie Scientifique, volume VII Logique. Paris: Hermann & Cie., 111.Google Scholar
Tarski, Alfred (1956): On the Concept of Logical Consequence. In: Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 409420.Google Scholar
Terrés Villalonga, Pilar (2019): From Natural to Formal Language: A Case for Logical Pluralism. Topoi, 38(2): 333345.Google Scholar
Terrés Villalonga, Pilar (2020): Substructural Logics, Pragmatic Enrichment and the Inferential Role of Logical Constants. Inquiy, 63(6): 628654.Google Scholar
Varzi, Achille C. (2002): On Logical Relativity. Philosophical Issues, 12: 197219.Google Scholar
Vicente, Augusín & Falkum, Ingrid (2017): Polysemy. In: Aronoff, Mark (ed.) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wansing, Heinrich (2020): Connexive Logic. In: Zalta, Edward N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Spring 2020 edition. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/logic-connexive/.Google Scholar
Warren, Jarred (2020): Shadows of Syntax. Revitalizing Logical and Mathematical Conventionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (1988): Equivocation and Existence. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 88: 109127.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (1994): Vagueness. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2014): Logic, Metalogic and Neutrality. Erkenntnis, 79(supplement issue 2): 211231.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2016): Absolute Provability and Safe Knowledge of the Axioms. In: Horsten, Leon & Welch, Philip (eds.) Gödel’s Disjunction. The Scope and Limits of Mathematical Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 243253.Google Scholar
Williamson, Timothy (2017): Semantic Paradoxes and Abductive Methodology. In: Armour-Garb, Bradley (ed.) Reflections on the Liar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 325346.Google Scholar
Woods, Jack (2019): Logical Partisanhood. Philosophical Studies, 176(5): 12031224.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin (1994): Truth and Objectivity. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin (2008): Relativism about Truth Itself. In: Relative Truth. Oxford: Oxford University, 157185.Google Scholar
Wyatt, Nicole & Payette, Gillman (2021): Against Logical Generalism. Synthese, 198(supplement issue 20): 48134830.Google Scholar
Yu, Andy Demfree (2018): Logic for Alethic, Logical, and Ontological Pluralists. In: Wyatt, Jeremy, Pedersen, Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding & Kellen, Nathan (eds.) Pluralisms in Truth and Logic. London: Palgrave MacMillan, 407427.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • References
  • Erik Stei, Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Book: Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence
  • Online publication: 23 March 2023
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • References
  • Erik Stei, Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Book: Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence
  • Online publication: 23 March 2023
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • References
  • Erik Stei, Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Book: Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence
  • Online publication: 23 March 2023
Available formats
×