Foundations of Logical Consequence: Suggested Reading
I've had some questions about where one should go to read preparatory material for the FLC project (Foundations of Logical Consequence). So I thought I'd recommend some literature for those interested in the project issues. These are personal recommendations, that is, papers that I find instructive and insightful. They are not intended as an introduction to the field!
Follow the link above to look at the project's Research Problems and the different phases. For those who are more or less new to the philosophy of logic, I recommend starting with the following SEP article.
Phase 1: Conceptions of Logical Consequence
The Bolzano-Tarski tradition:
Alfred Tarski (1936/2003) 'On the Concept of Following Logically'. Translated From The Polish and German By Magda Stroinska and David Hitchcock. History and Philosophy of Logic, Vol. 23. [This is a recent translation of Tarski's seminal article. The translation is directly from the Polish original, not from the German version.]
John Etchemendy (1990), The Concept of Logical Consequence, Harvard University Press. [Arguably, it was this book that reopened the systematic investigation of the foundations of logical consequence.]
The Gentzen tradition:
Arthur Prior (1960), 'The runabout inference-ticket', Analysis, vol. 21. [Short but wonderful. A criticism motivating much of the recent work in proof-theoretic semantics.]
Stephen Read (2000), 'Harmony and Autonomy in Classical Logic', JPL, vol. 29. [A bit on the heavy side, but brings you up to speed on inferentialism and harmony in the Dummett-Prawitz tradition.]
Phase 2: Structure of Logical Consequence
Arnon Avron (1992), 'Simple Consequence Relations', Information and Computation. [Instructive about the generality of logical consequence in the post-substructural world.]
Greg Restall (2005), 'Multiple Conclusions', Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress. Edited by Petr Hajek, Luis Valdes-Villanueva and Dag Westerstahl, Kings’ College Publications, pp. 189–205. [Offers a reconception of sequent calculus in a assertion/denial framework.]
Phase 3: Revisionism in Logic
Graham Priest (2006), Doubt Truth to be a Liar, OUP. [Chapter 10 on Logic and Revisability is a favourite of mine. A defence of the revisability of logic, and a criticism of Quine on logic.]
JC Beall & Greg Restall (2006), Logical Pluralism, OUP. [Short and provocative, but probably the only systematic, book-length attempt at dealing with logical pluralism.]
Phase 4: The Epistemology of Logic
Crispin Wright (2001), 'On Basic Logical Knowledge', Phil. Studies, vol. 106 [Perhaps I should have put Boghossian up here, but instead I've picked two papers discussing Boghossian. Crispin's is an excellent discussion of the justification of deduction.]
Timothy Williamson (2003), 'Understanding and Inference', Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, Vol. 77. [Williamson provides a groundbreaking criticism of the inferentialist epistemology. Continued in his The Philosophy of Philosophy.]
Any other suggestions are of course welcome! The list could go on and on, but I've tried to contain myself. For more relevant references, check out these (inexhaustive) Arché bibliographies.
Follow the link above to look at the project's Research Problems and the different phases. For those who are more or less new to the philosophy of logic, I recommend starting with the following SEP article.
Phase 1: Conceptions of Logical Consequence
The Bolzano-Tarski tradition:
Alfred Tarski (1936/2003) 'On the Concept of Following Logically'. Translated From The Polish and German By Magda Stroinska and David Hitchcock. History and Philosophy of Logic, Vol. 23. [This is a recent translation of Tarski's seminal article. The translation is directly from the Polish original, not from the German version.]
John Etchemendy (1990), The Concept of Logical Consequence, Harvard University Press. [Arguably, it was this book that reopened the systematic investigation of the foundations of logical consequence.]
The Gentzen tradition:
Arthur Prior (1960), 'The runabout inference-ticket', Analysis, vol. 21. [Short but wonderful. A criticism motivating much of the recent work in proof-theoretic semantics.]
Stephen Read (2000), 'Harmony and Autonomy in Classical Logic', JPL, vol. 29. [A bit on the heavy side, but brings you up to speed on inferentialism and harmony in the Dummett-Prawitz tradition.]
Phase 2: Structure of Logical Consequence
Arnon Avron (1992), 'Simple Consequence Relations', Information and Computation. [Instructive about the generality of logical consequence in the post-substructural world.]
Greg Restall (2005), 'Multiple Conclusions', Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress. Edited by Petr Hajek, Luis Valdes-Villanueva and Dag Westerstahl, Kings’ College Publications, pp. 189–205. [Offers a reconception of sequent calculus in a assertion/denial framework.]
Phase 3: Revisionism in Logic
Graham Priest (2006), Doubt Truth to be a Liar, OUP. [Chapter 10 on Logic and Revisability is a favourite of mine. A defence of the revisability of logic, and a criticism of Quine on logic.]
JC Beall & Greg Restall (2006), Logical Pluralism, OUP. [Short and provocative, but probably the only systematic, book-length attempt at dealing with logical pluralism.]
Phase 4: The Epistemology of Logic
Crispin Wright (2001), 'On Basic Logical Knowledge', Phil. Studies, vol. 106 [Perhaps I should have put Boghossian up here, but instead I've picked two papers discussing Boghossian. Crispin's is an excellent discussion of the justification of deduction.]
Timothy Williamson (2003), 'Understanding and Inference', Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume, Vol. 77. [Williamson provides a groundbreaking criticism of the inferentialist epistemology. Continued in his The Philosophy of Philosophy.]
Any other suggestions are of course welcome! The list could go on and on, but I've tried to contain myself. For more relevant references, check out these (inexhaustive) Arché bibliographies.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment