Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

In Search of an Integrated Logic of Conviction and Intention

By Prof. em. Dr. Hans-Ulrich Hoche

Abstract

According to a two-level criterion for combination tests in the field of ordinary language (C-CT), moral 'ought'-sentences may be taken to imply 'I intend'-sentences partly semantically and partly pragmatically. If so, a trenchant linguistic analysis of the concept of moral obligation cannot do without a non-classical logic which allows to model these important kinds of ordinary-language implications by means of purely syntactical derivations. For this purpose, an integrated logic of conviction and intention has been tentatively devised by way of a doxastically, buletically, and pragmatically extended calculus of natural deduction. This system of buletic logic cannot even be launched without one or two derivation rules of deductive closedness. However, these very closedness rules appear to be responsible for buletic paradoxes which are analogous to paradoxes long since known from other, less exotic branches of logic but at first sight look much more virulent. After having scrutinized two potential strategies for coping with the paradoxes of buletic logic, finally we can convince ourselves that these paradoxes, as well as their familiar non-buletic counterparts, are but apparent paradoxes, provided we consistently lean on C-CT and do not let pragmatical considerations intrude into purely logical ones

Topics: Logic
Publisher: Duncker & Humblot
Year: 2004
OAI identifier: oai:cogprints.org:4756
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://cogprints.org/4756/1/Mi... (external link)
  • http://cogprints.org/4756/ (external link)
  • Suggested articles

    Citations

    1. (2003). (2003b): Personal communication to the author,
    2. (1974). A New Semantical Theory of Egocentric Particulars’.
    3. (1985). Analytische Philosophie [Analytical philosophy]. Freiburg / Munich: Karl Alber (= Handbuch Philosophie [Handbook of philosophy],
    4. (1999). Die Logik der Sprache der Moral [The logic of the language of morals].
    5. (1965). Elementary Logic.
    6. (1969). Glauben und Wissen. Eine Untersuchung zur epistemischen Logik [Believing and knowing. An enquiry into epistemic logic]. Doctoral thesis,
    7. (1980). Glauben, Wissen und Wahrscheinlichkeit. Systeme der epistemischen Logik [Belief, knowledge, and probability. Systems of epistemic logic].
    8. (1983). Intentionality. An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. doi
    9. (1975). Logic and Conversation’.
    10. (1974). Logik und Wollen. Eine Untersuchung einiger formaler Eigenschaften umgangssprachlicher Wollensbegriffe [Logic and wanting. An enquiry into some formal properties of ordinary-language concepts of wanting]. Doctoral thesis
    11. (1994). Monographie von Hans-Ulrich Hoche: Elemente einer Anatomie der Verpflichtung’ [‘On a supposed connection between being under a moral obligation and intending. Discussion of the monograph by Hans-Ulrich Hoche: Elements of an anatomy of obligation’]. In:
    12. (1950). On Referring’. Reprinted in: Strawson, Logico-Linguistic Papers, doi
    13. (2002). Personal communication to the author,
    14. (1953). Philosophische Untersuchungen / Philosophical Investigations. doi
    15. (1971). Practical Inferences,
    16. (1979). Pragmatics. Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form.
    17. (1944). Russell’s “Theory of Descriptions”’. Reprinted in: Moore, Philosophical Papers,
    18. (1967). Some Alleged Differences between Imperatives and Indicatives’.
    19. (1932). Symbolic Logic.
    20. (1961). The Causal Theory of Perception’. Reprinted
    21. (2003). This paper resulted from a discussion of a predecessor paper (Hoche 2002) in the Logico-Linguistic Colloquy of the Institute of Philosophy at the University of Bochum on February 7,
    22. (1978). Truth and other enigmas.
    23. (1994). Ueber einen vermuteten Zusammenhang von Muessen und Wollen.
    24. (1960). Word and Object.

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.