Hyperfine-Grained Meanings in Classical Logic

This paper develops a semantics for a fragment of English that is based on the idea of `impossible possible worlds'. This idea has earlier been formulated by authors such as Montague, Cresswell, Hintikka, and Rantala, but the present set-up shows how it can be formalized in a completely unproblematic logic---the ordinary classical theory of types. The theory is put to use in an account of propositional attitudes that is `hyperfine-grained', i.e. that does not suffer from the well-known problems involved with replacing expressions by logical equivalents

Proof-theoretic pluralism

Starting from a proof-theoretic perspective, wheremeaning is determined by the inference rules governing logical operators, in this paper we primarily aim at developing a proof-theoretic alternative to the model-theoretic meaning-invariant logical pluralism discussed in Beall and Restall (Logical pluralism, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006). We will also outline how this framework can be easily extended to include a form of meaning-variant logical pluralism. In this respect, the framework developed in this paper\u2014which we label two-level proof-theoretic pluralism\u2014is much broader in scope than the one discussed in Beall and Restall\u2019s book

Second-order logic is logic

"Second-order logic" is the name given to a formal system. Some claim that the formal system is a logical system. Others claim that it is a mathematical system. In the thesis, I examine these claims in the light of some philosophical criteria which first motivated Frege in his logicist project. The criteria are that a logic should be universal, it should reflect our intuitive notion of logical validity, and it should be analytic. The analysis is interesting in two respects. One is conceptual: it gives us a purchase on where and how to draw a distinction between logic and other sciences. The other interest is historical: showing that second-order logic is a logical system according to the philosophical criteria mentioned above goes some way towards vindicating Frege's logicist project in a contemporary context

Quantification in the Interpretational Theory of Validity

According to the interpretational theory of logical validity (IR), logical validity is preservation of truth in all interpretations compatible with the intended meaning of logical expressions. IR suffers from a seemingly defeating objection, the so-called cardinality problem: any instance of the statement "There are n things" is true under all interpretations, since it can be written down using only logical expressions that are not to be reinterpreted; yet "There are n things" is not logically true. I argue that the cardinality problem is indeed a serious problem for IR, when understood in terms of "asymmetry of information". I then argue that IR can be rehabilitated by making quantifiers context-sensitive: what we do not reinterpret is the Kaplanian character of a quantifier, rather than its content. "There are n things" is false in a context where fewer than n things are relevant, so it is not logically true in IR. I finally discuss some objections and ramifications of my account: I discuss how to make space for the possibility of an explicitly absolutely general quantifier in my framework, how terms can be logical even though context-sensitive, and how to recapture classical logic within my framework

Proof theoretic criteria for logical constancy

Logic concerns inference, and some inferences can be distinguished from others by their holding as a matter of logic itself, rather than say empirical factors. These inferences are known as logical consequences and have a special status due to the strong level of confidence they inspire. Given this importance, this dissertation investigates a method of separating the logical from the non-logical. The method used is based on proof theory, and builds on the work of Prawitz, Dummett and Read. Requirements for logicality are developed based on a literature review of common philosophical use of the term, with the key factors being formality, and the absolute generality / topic neutrality of interpretations of logical constants. These requirements are used to generate natural deduction criteria for logical constancy, resulting in the classification of certain predicates, truth functional propositional operators, first order quantifiers, second order quantifiers in sound and complete formal systems using Henkin semantics, and modal operators from the systems K and S5 as logical constants. Semantic tableaux proof systems are also investigated, resulting in the production of semantic tableaux-based criteria for logicality