more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
An explanation is often a deductive argument, with the fact needing explaining as its conclusion. ...But the conclusion is usually given in advance, and we may only believe the premisses because they plausibly explain the conclusion.
Gist of Idea
An explanation is often a deduction, but that may well beg the question
Source
Michael Dummett (The Justification of Deduction [1973], p.296)
Book Ref
Dummett,Michael: 'Truth and Other Enigmas' [Duckworth 1978], p.296
A Reaction
[compressed (Dummett's wordy prose cries out for it!)] I suppose this works better in mathematics, which is central to Dummett's interests. In the real world the puzzle is not usually logically implied by its explanation.
| 11066 | Deduction is justified by the semantics of its metalanguage [Dummett, by Hanna] |
| 19058 | Syntactic consequence is positive, for validity; semantic version is negative, with counterexamples [Dummett] |
| 19059 | In standard views you could replace 'true' and 'false' with mere 0 and 1 [Dummett] |
| 19060 | Truth-tables are dubious in some cases, and may be a bad way to explain connective meaning [Dummett] |
| 19061 | An explanation is often a deduction, but that may well beg the question [Dummett] |
| 19062 | Classical two-valued semantics implies that meaning is grasped through truth-conditions [Dummett] |
| 19063 | Beth trees show semantics for intuitionistic logic, in terms of how truth has been established [Dummett] |
| 19064 | Holism is not a theory of meaning; it is the denial that a theory of meaning is possible [Dummett] |
| 19065 | Soundness and completeness proofs test the theory of meaning, rather than the logic theory [Dummett] |
| 19066 | Philosophy aims to understand the world, through ordinary experience and science [Dummett] |
| 19067 | A successful proof requires recognition of truth at every step [Dummett] |