Incompatibility, Modal Semantics and Intrinsic Logic
ثبت نشده
چکیده
I closed my lecture last week with an argument building on the idea that every autonomous discursive practice, in order to count as a discursive or linguistic practice, in order to count as deploying any vocabulary, must include performances that have the pragmatic significance of assertions, which on the syntactic side are utterances of declarative sentences, and whose semantic content consists of propositions. These pragmatic, syntactic, and semantic conditions form an indissoluble package in the sense that one cannot properly understand any of the concepts assertion, sentence, and proposition apart from their relation to each other. This is the iron triangle of discursiveness:
منابع مشابه
Some Critical Remarks on Incompatibility Semantics
In his fifth Locke Lecture (2006)1 Robert Brandom has presented a new type of semantics for propositional classical and modal logic (‘incompatibility semantics’) that is embedded in his quite general programme (‘inferential pragmatism’) addressing major challenges to analytic philosophy. Inferential pragmatism is an important, comprehensive, and widely discussed contribution to contemporary phi...
متن کاملCathoristic logic: A modal logic of incompatible propositions
Cathoristic logic is a multi-modal logic where negation is replaced by a novel operator allowing the expression of incompatible sentences. We present the syntax and semantics of the logic including complete proof rules, and establish a number of results such as compactness, a semantic characterisation of elementary equivalence, the existence of a quadratic-time decision procedure, and Brandom’s...
متن کاملLecture Notes on Soundness and Correspondence 15-816: Modal Logic
In the lecture 5 we have followed an axiomatic and a semantic approach to modal logic. But do these approaches fit together? We should not be using proof rules that make no sense semantically. Recall the axioms and proof rules we had so far Figure 1. The proof rules are sound iff they can only derive semantical consequences. Note that, unlike in the first lectures, this is an external soundness...
متن کاملModal Foundations for Predicate Logic
The complexity of any logical modeling reeects both the intrinsic structure of a topic described and the weight of the formal tools. Some of this weight seems inherent in even the most basic logical systems. Notably, standard predicate logic is undecidable. In this paper, we investigatèlighter' versions of this general purpose tool, by modally`deconstructing' the usual semantics, and locating i...
متن کاملBetween Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism
Pragmatic definitions of material incompatibility and two kinds of consequence: • Incompatibility of p and q: If S is committed to p, then S is not entitled to q. • Committive consequence: If S is committed to p, then S is committed to q. • Permissive consequence: If S is committed and entitled to p, then S is (prima facie) entitled to q. " And those who introduce the notion of connexion say th...
متن کامل