back to ideas for this text


Single Idea 18804

[from 'The Boundary Stones of Thought' by Ian Rumfitt, in 5. Theory of Logic / A. Overview of Logic / 6. Classical Logic ]

Full Idea

I think it is a strategic mistake to rest the case for classical logic on the Principle of Bivalence: the soundness of the classical logic rules is far more compelling than the truth of Bivalence.

Gist of Idea

The case for classical logic rests on its rules, much more than on the Principle of Bivalence

Source

Ian Rumfitt (The Boundary Stones of Thought [2015], 1.1)

Book Reference

Rumfitt,Ian: 'The Boundary Stones of Thought' [OUP 2015], p.13


A Reaction

The 'rules' to which he is referring are those of 'natural deduction', which make very few assumptions, and are intended to be intuitively appealing.