We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
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 .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
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.
This chapter examines Dana Scott’s project of treating a logic of entailment as one that captures its own deducibility relation in the sense that it represents (and vindicates) the way in which the theorems of the logic themselves are derived. For example, a reflexive logic that is axiomatized using the rule of modus ponens also contains the entailment ‘(A and A entails B) entails B’. It is argued in this chapter that the reflexivity constraints get in the way of the logic’s being used as a general theory of theory closure. A logic should be closed under its own principles of inference, but the logic should be able to be used with theories that are radically different from itself.
The semantical framework for the positive view of this book is one in which entailment is understood primarily in terms of theory closure. This chapter outlines both the history of the notion, beginning with Alfred Tarski’s theory of closure operators, and the relationship between closure operators and the entailment connective. At the end of the chapter, it is shown how closure operators can be used to model a simple logic, Graham Priest’s logic N4.
What follows from what, and how do we make statements (whether true or false) about which inferences are correct? In this book, Edwin Mares provides a new philosophical, semantical and historical analysis of and justification for the relevant logic of entailment. In the first half of the book he examines some key ideas in the historical development of the logic of entailment, looking in particular at the notion 'is derivable from' and at how symbolic logic has attempted to capture this notion. In the second half of the book he develops his own theory connecting ideas from the traditions in mathematical logic with some ideas in the philosophy of science. The book's fresh and original perspective on the logic of entailment will be valuable for all who want to know more about the historical and philosophical origins of modern symbolic logic.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.