dc.contributor.author | Martin, Ben | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-02-24T09:41:41Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-02-24T09:41:41Z | |
dc.date.created | 2020-10-30T18:06:30Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2020-03-13 | |
dc.Published | Synthese. 2020, . | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0039-7857 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2729994 | |
dc.description.abstract | Given the plethora of competing logical theories of validity available, it’s understandable that there has been a marked increase in interest in logical epistemology within the literature. If we are to choose between these logical theories, we require a good understanding of the suitable criteria we ought to judge according to. However, so far there’s been a lack of appreciation of how logical practice could support an epistemology of logic. This paper aims to correct that error, by arguing for a practice-based approach to logical epistemology. By looking at the types of evidence logicians actually appeal to in attempting to support their theories, we can provide a more detailed and realistic picture of logical epistemology. To demonstrate the fruitfulness of a practice-based approach, we look to a particular case of logical argumentation—the dialetheist’s arguments based upon the self-referential paradoxes—and show that the evidence appealed to support a particular theory of logical epistemology, logical abductivism. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Springer | en_US |
dc.rights | Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no | * |
dc.title | Identifying logical evidence | en_US |
dc.type | Journal article | en_US |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en_US |
dc.description.version | publishedVersion | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | Copyright The Author(s) 2020 | en_US |
cristin.ispublished | true | |
cristin.fulltext | original | |
cristin.qualitycode | 2 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11229-020-02618-y | |
dc.identifier.cristin | 1843744 | |
dc.source.journal | Synthese | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Synthese, 2020. | en_US |