more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 10970

[filed under theme 5. Theory of Logic / B. Logical Consequence / 1. Logical Consequence ]

Full Idea

A theory of logical consequence, while requiring a conceptual analysis of consequence, also searches for a set of techniques to determine the validity of particular arguments.

Gist of Idea

A theory of logical consequence is a conceptual analysis, and a set of validity techniques

Source

Stephen Read (Thinking About Logic [1995], Ch.2)

Book Ref

Read,Stephen: 'Thinking About Logic' [OUP 1995], p.35

The 28 ideas with the same theme [defining when one idea logically follows another]:

12373 Something holds universally when it is proved of an arbitrary and primitive case [Aristotle]
23173 If a syllogism admits one absurdity, others must follow [Aquinas]
13342 Carnap defined consequence by contradiction, but this is unintuitive and changes with substitution [Tarski on Carnap]
18812 Split out the logical vocabulary, make an assignment to the rest. It's logical if premises and conclusion match [Tarski, by Rumfitt]
13681 Logical consequence is marked by being preserved under all nonlogical substitutions [Quine, by Sider]
13827 Logical consequence isn't a black box (Tarski's approach); we should explain how arguments work [Prawitz]
14181 Validity is where either the situation or the interpretation blocks true premises and false conclusion [Etchemendy, by Read]
14180 Etchemendy says fix the situation and vary the interpretation, or fix interpretations with varying situations [Etchemendy, by Read]
10260 Logical consequence is defined by the impossibility of P and ¬q [Field,H, by Shapiro]
17286 Logical consequence is verification by a possible world within a truth-set [Fine,K]
10300 Logical consequence can be defined in terms of the logical terminology [Shapiro]
14188 Not all arguments are valid because of form; validity is just true premises and false conclusion being impossible [Read]
14182 If the logic of 'taller of' rests just on meaning, then logic may be the study of merely formal consequence [Read]
14183 Maybe arguments are only valid when suppressed premises are all stated - but why? [Read]
13679 Maybe logical consequence is more a matter of provability than of truth-preservation [Sider]
13682 Maybe logical consequence is impossibility of the premises being true and the consequent false [Sider]
13680 Maybe logical consequence is a primitive notion [Sider]
13678 The most popular account of logical consequence is the semantic or model-theoretic one [Sider]
10984 Logical consequence isn't just a matter of form; it depends on connections like round-square [Read]
10970 A theory of logical consequence is a conceptual analysis, and a set of validity techniques [Read]
15029 Modal accounts of logical consequence are simple necessity, or essential use of logical words [Sider]
18755 Validity is explained as truth in all models, because that relies on the logical terms [McGee]
11061 Intensional consequence is based on the content of the concepts [Hanna]
13288 Consequence is truth-preserving, either despite substitutions, or in all interpretations [Koslicki]
18813 Logical consequence is a relation that can extended into further statements [Rumfitt]
12195 Soundness in argument varies with context, and may be achieved very informally indeed [Rumfitt]
12199 There is a modal element in consequence, in assessing reasoning from suppositions [Rumfitt]
12201 We reject deductions by bad consequence, so logical consequence can't be deduction [Rumfitt]