more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 19060

[filed under theme 4. Formal Logic / B. Propositional Logic PL / 3. Truth Tables ]

Full Idea

It is arguable whether two-valued truth tables give correct meanings for certain sentential operators, and even whether they constitute legitimate explanations of any possible sentential operators.

Gist of Idea

Truth-tables are dubious in some cases, and may be a bad way to explain connective meaning

Source

Michael Dummett (The Justification of Deduction [1973], p.294)

Book Ref

Dummett,Michael: 'Truth and Other Enigmas' [Duckworth 1978], p.294


A Reaction

See 'Many-valued logic' for examples of non-binary truth tables. Presumably logicians should aspire to make their semantics precise, as well as their syntax.


The 11 ideas from 'The Justification of Deduction'

Deduction is justified by the semantics of its metalanguage [Dummett, by Hanna]
Syntactic consequence is positive, for validity; semantic version is negative, with counterexamples [Dummett]
In standard views you could replace 'true' and 'false' with mere 0 and 1 [Dummett]
Truth-tables are dubious in some cases, and may be a bad way to explain connective meaning [Dummett]
An explanation is often a deduction, but that may well beg the question [Dummett]
Classical two-valued semantics implies that meaning is grasped through truth-conditions [Dummett]
Beth trees show semantics for intuitionistic logic, in terms of how truth has been established [Dummett]
Holism is not a theory of meaning; it is the denial that a theory of meaning is possible [Dummett]
Soundness and completeness proofs test the theory of meaning, rather than the logic theory [Dummett]
Philosophy aims to understand the world, through ordinary experience and science [Dummett]
A successful proof requires recognition of truth at every step [Dummett]