Logical pluralism is the view that there is more than one correct logic. This is not necessarily a controversial claim but in its most exciting formulations, pluralism extends to logics that have typically been considered rival accounts of logical consequence – to logics, that is, which adopt seemingly contradictory views about basic logical laws or arguments. The logical pluralist challenges the philosophical orthodoxy that an argument is either deductively valid or invalid by claiming that there is more than one way for an argument to be valid. In this book, Erik Stei defends logical monism, provides a detailed analysis of different possible formulations of logical pluralism, and offers an original account of the plurality of correct logics that incorporates the benefits of both pluralist and monist approaches to logical consequence. His book will be valuable for a range of readers in the philosophy of logic.

‘Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence provides the reader with both a comprehensive survey of the various accounts of logic that fall under the heading ‘logical pluralism', and complex and compelling arguments against each of these accounts in favor of logical monism – the claim that there is a single correct logic. Stei's book will be a touchstone for any work on this topic going forward, both for and against the pluralist thesis.'

Roy T. Cook - University of Minnesota-Twin Cities