DOCSLIB.ORG

Formalism and the Notion of Truth Joseph Spencer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Formalism and the Notion of Truth Joseph Spencer University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Philosophy ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 6-26-2015 Formalism and the Notion of Truth Joseph Spencer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/phil_etds Recommended Citation Spencer, Joseph. "Formalism and the Notion of Truth." (2015). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/phil_etds/10 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Joseph M. Spencer Candidate Philosophy Department This dissertation is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication: Approved by the Dissertation Committee: Paul M. Livingston, Chairperson Iain Thomson Kelly Becker William Martin i FORMALISM AND THE NOTION OF TRUTH by JOSEPH M. SPENCER B.A., Philosophy, Brigham Young University, 2004 M.L.I.S., Library Science, San José State University, 2009 M.A., Philosophy, University of New Mexico, 2012 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Philosophy The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico May, 2015 ii FORMALISM AND THE NOTION OF TRUTH by Joseph M. Spencer B.A., Philosophy, Brigham Young University, 2004 M.L.I.S., Library Science, San José State University, 2009 M.A., Philosophy, University of New Mexico, 2012 Ph.D., Philosophy, University of New Mexico, 2015 ABSTRACT The most widely acknowledged conceptions of truth take some kind of relation to be at truth’s core. This dissertation attempts to establish that an adequate conception of this relation begins with an investigation of the entanglement of the formal and the material as set forth in the model theoretical development of set theoretical mathematics. Truth concerns first and most crucially a certain commerce across the border between the formal and the material, between the ideal and the real. The entanglement of the formal and the material must be thought in itself, apart from or prior to any assimilation into philosophical schemas committed to larger metaphysical claims. This is accomplished in model theory. The twentieth century witnessed two attempts at bringing model theoretical mathematics to bear on accounting philosophically for the concept of truth: that of Alfred iii Tarski, and that of Alain Badiou. In order to investigate the relevance of model theory to the task of working out a philosophical conception of truth, this dissertation investigates, through comparative work, these two thinkers. It is necessary to see where their projects converge in important ways, as well as where their projects diverge in equally important ways. What brings their work into close proximity is their shared conviction that truth must be thought in light of model theory. Nonetheless, the two do not agree about exactly how model theory sheds light on truth. Comparative study thus reveals both a shared site for thinking and a struggle over the significance of that site. Agreement between Tarski and Badiou concerns the excess of the purely formal over itself, marked by the generation of an undecidable statement within formal systems of a certain level of complexity. Both thinkers determine that this formal excess touches on the material, and both further determine that the consequent entanglement of the formal and the material provides the basic frame for any philosophical consideration of truth. The point of disagreement is ultimately rooted in a difference of opinion about the adequacy of thinking the concept of truth independently of an account of what philosophers of science call theory change. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1 – PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS ....................................... 7 Thesis and Argument ..................................................................................... 9 Comparative Study ......................................................................................... 12 Badiou on Tarski ............................................................................................ 19 Balibar on Badiou .......................................................................................... 27 CHAPTER 2 – TARSKI’S PROJECT ................................................................... 36 Material Adequacy ......................................................................................... 39 The Definition of Truth .................................................................................. 50 Truth and Satisfaction .................................................................................... 61 CHAPTER 3 – BADIOU’S PROJECT .................................................................. 76 The Question of Being ................................................................................... 79 Voids and Events ............................................................................................ 92 Set Theory and Truth .....................................................................................106 CHAPTER 4 – TRUTH, SET THEORY, AND MODELS ...................................117 Divergence, Convergence ..............................................................................120 Model Theory and Ontology ..........................................................................126 The Debate .....................................................................................................138 Material Adequacy and Model Theory ..........................................................150 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................154 WORKS CITED.......................................................................................................158 v INTRODUCTION For as long as truth has been investigated philosophically, it has been recognized that there must be some kind of relation at work in truth, whether that relation has been taken to be a matter of correspondence between minds and objects, of coherence among terms or claims made regardless of inaccessible states of affairs, or of fulfillment of intentions and aims in practical encounters with the world. In the course of this dissertation, I attempt to establish that an adequate conception of the relation that lies at the heart of truth begins with an investigation of the entanglement of the formal and the material as this is set forth in the model theoretical development of set theoretical mathematics. Truth, I argue, concerns first and most crucially a certain commerce across the border between the formal and the material, between the ideal and the real. But this means that essential to posing the question of truth is establishing the basic nature of this commerce. The entanglement of the formal and the material must be thought in itself, apart from or prior to any assimilation into philosophical schemas committed to larger metaphysical claims. This is accomplished, on my argument, in model theory. Strange as it might sound to say it, model theory presents a purely formal theory of the entanglement of the formal and the material. For this reason, it establishes what might be called the site of the problem of truth. Significantly, the twentieth century witnessed two attempts at bringing model theoretical mathematics to bear on accounting philosophically for the concept of truth. The first was the well-known work of Alfred Tarski, undertaken over the course of the 1 1930s and 1940s. The second was the less-familiar work of Alain Badiou, launched in the 1960s but brought to its first real flowering only in the 1980s. To investigate the relevance of model theory to the task of working out a philosophical conception of truth, it is necessary to investigate quite closely the work of these two thinkers. As a result, much of the work I undertake in the course of this dissertation is dedicated to close comparative readings of their most important writings on truth. It is necessary to see where their projects converge in important ways, as well as where their projects diverge in equally important ways. What seems rather clearly to bring their work into close proximity is what I take to be their shared conviction that truth must be thought beginning from a chiefly formal investigation of the entanglement of the formal and the material, and that in light of model theory. On my interpretation, in other words, Tarski and Badiou agree on the site of the problem of truth. Nonetheless and unsurprisingly, the two do not agree about exactly how model theory sheds light on truth. As a result, by looking comparatively at these two thinkers’ work, it is possible to present a kind of struggle over the significance of model theoretical considerations for any thinking of truth. The essence of the agreement between Tarski and Badiou is not difficult to summarize. Both thinkers focus on a certain excess of the purely formal over itself, marked by the generation of an undecidable statement within formal systems of a certain level of complexity. Both thinkers then determine that this excess concerns, precisely, the material, and both thinkers further determine that the consequent entanglement of the formal and the material provides the basic frame for any philosophical consideration of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Formalism Or “The Regime of Truth”: a Reading of Adrienne Rich’S
    International Journal of Linguistics and Literature (IJLL) ISSN 2319-3956 Vol. 2, Issue 4, Sep 2013, 19-28 © IASET FORMALISM OR “THE REGIME OF TRUTH”: A READING OF ADRIENNE RICH’S A CHANGE OF WORLD NAHID MOHAMMADI Department of English Language and Literature, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran ABSTRACT Formalism in Adrienne Rich‟s first book, A Change of World, has attracted different critics and scholars so far. In their interpretations, it seems that they have taken it for granted that Adrienne Rich was a formalist. But none of them has ever presented the cause for the emergence of formalism in Adrienne Rich‟s early poetry. In this paper, I draw upon Michel Foucault‟s theory of “repressive power” and demonstrate that formalism was actually “the regime of truth” which determined „true/false‟ poetry for the young poet and excluded some poetic discourses and permitted only some particular ones to come into being in her first book. KEYWORDS: Adrienne Rich, A Change of World, Formalism, Michel Foucault, Discourse Analysis, Repressive Power, Exclusion, Truth, The Regime of Truth INTRODUCTION Almost all critics of Adrienne Rich‟s poetry agree that her early poems in A Change of World (1951) have been the poet‟s practice of distancing devices of modernist formalism which was dominant among the poets in the United States in the 1950s. Trudi Dawne Witonsky, who has examined Adrienne Rich‟s works in terms of Paulo Freire‟s theory of praxis1, admits that, in her early poetry, Rich wrote under the doctrine of New Critical formalism. She goes further and states that Rich‟s transition from formalism in her early poetry to feminism in her later volumes happens because of the „inadequacy of formalist‟ theory (Witonsky)2.
    [Show full text]
  • From Frames to Inference
    From Frames to Inference Nancy Chang, Srini Narayanan, and Miriam R.L. Petruck International Computer Science Institute 1947 Center St., Suite 600, Berkeley, CA 94704 nchang,miriamp,snarayan ¡ @icsi.berkeley.edu Abstract money ($1000) to another (Jerry) in exchange for some goods (a car) – but differ in the perspective This paper describes a computational they impose on the scene. formalism that captures structural rela- The shared inferential structure of verbs like buy tionships among participants in a dy- and sell is captured in FrameNet by the COMMERCE namic scenario. This representation is frame, which is associated with a set of situational used to describe the internal structure of roles, or frame elements (FEs), corresponding to FrameNet frames in terms of parameters event participants and props. These FEs are used for active event simulations. We apply our as annotation tags for sentences like those in (1), formalism to the commerce domain and yielding, for example: show how it provides a flexible means of handling linguistic perspective and other Buyer Goods challenges of semantic representation. (2) a. [Chuck] bought [a car] [from Jerry]Seller [for $1000]Payment. 1 Introduction b. [Jerry]Seller sold [a car]Goods [to Chuck]Buyer [for $1000]Payment. The development of lexical semantic resources is widely recognized as a prerequisite to progress in FE tags act as a shorthand that allows diverse verbs scalable natural language understanding. One of the to tap into a common subset of encyclopedic knowl- most semantically sophisticated efforts in this direc- edge. Moreover, regularities in the set of FEs real- tion is FrameNet (Baker et al., 1998; Fillmore et al., ized with specific lexical items can be taken as cor- 2001), an online lexical resource1 designed accord- related with their favored perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • The Implications of Neurobiology on the Study and Interpretation of Scripture
    READING THE BODY, READING SCRIPTURE: THE IMPLICATIONS OF NEUROBIOLOGY ON THE STUDY AND INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE David Cave This paper considers what the neurobiological reading of the body implies for the reading of scripture. By ‘the neurological reading of the body’ I refer to how modern science and culture draw upon cognitive science and genetics to explain and to understand what it means to be human. And by the ‘reading of scripture’ I refer to the practice of the various religious traditions to understand our humanity based on claims of inspired and revealed insights, said to come from some agency transcendent to our naturalized mind and body. I contend that within a naturalistic system these two readings are not mutually exclusive but interrelate such that the reading of one informs and illumines the reading of the other. Among many quarters, the reading of the body has come to rival, even replace, the reading of scripture (and here I refer to scripture broadly understood, of no particular religious tradition) for defining and guiding us in what it means to be a human being. In a recent opinion piece in the New York Times, columnist David Brooks, in “The Neural Buddhists,” comments on the widespread interest in neuroscience and genetics and surmises that its proponents will not so much undermine a belief in God as undermine the claims of scripture. He says, “The atheism debate is a textbook example of how a scientific revolution can change public cul- ture . and yet my guess is that the atheism debate is going to be a side- show.
    [Show full text]
  • Formalism and Realism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse)
    University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Articles Colorado Law Faculty Scholarship 2009 Formalism and Realism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse) Pierre Schlag University of Colorado Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/articles Part of the Jurisprudence Commons, and the Law and Politics Commons Citation Information Pierre Schlag, Formalism and Realism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse), 95 Iowa L. Rev. 195 (2009) (reprinted with permission), available at . Copyright Statement Copyright protected. Use of materials from this collection beyond the exceptions provided for in the Fair Use and Educational Use clauses of the U.S. Copyright Law may violate federal law. Permission to publish or reproduce is required. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Colorado Law Faculty Scholarship at Colorado Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles by an authorized administrator of Colorado Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. +(,121/,1( Citation: 95 Iowa L. Rev. 195 2009-2010 Provided by: William A. Wise Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Thu Mar 2 17:47:48 2017 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: Copyright Information Formalism and Realism in Ruins (Mapping the Logics of Collapse) PierreSchlag* ABSTRACT: After laying out a conventional account of the formalism vs.
    [Show full text]
  • UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title Intention and Normative Belief Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8725w3wp Author Chislenko, Eugene Publication Date 2016 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Intention and Normative Belief By Eugene Chislenko A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Hannah Ginsborg, Co-Chair Professor R. Jay Wallace, Co-Chair Professor Hubert Dreyfus Professor Tania Lombrozo Spring 2016 Copyright by Eugene Chislenko 2016 Abstract Intention and Normative Belief by Eugene Chislenko Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of California, Berkeley Professor Hannah Ginsborg and Professor R. Jay Wallace, Co-Chairs People can be malicious, perverse, compulsive, self-destructive, indifferent, or in conflict with their own better judgment. This much is obvious—but on many traditional views, it seems puzzling or even impossible. Many philosophers, from Plato and Aristotle to Kant, Davidson, and others, have thought that we act only “under the guise of the good,” doing only what we see as good, or best, or what we ought to do. These “guise-of-the-good” views offered a way to make sense of the attribution and explanation of action, while maintaining a generous view of human nature as essentially pursuing the good. But are they not hopelessly narrow and naïve? It seems clear that we often do what we do not see as good, and even what we see as bad.
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanism, Mentalism, and Metamathematics Synthese Library
    MECHANISM, MENTALISM, AND METAMATHEMATICS SYNTHESE LIBRARY STUDIES IN EPISTEMOLOGY, LOGIC, METHODOLOGY, AND PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Managing Editor: JAAKKO HINTIKKA, Florida State University Editors: ROBER T S. COHEN, Boston University DONALD DAVIDSON, University o/Chicago GABRIEL NUCHELMANS, University 0/ Leyden WESLEY C. SALMON, University 0/ Arizona VOLUME 137 JUDSON CHAMBERS WEBB Boston University. Dept. 0/ Philosophy. Boston. Mass .• U.S.A. MECHANISM, MENT ALISM, AND MET AMA THEMA TICS An Essay on Finitism i Springer-Science+Business Media, B.V. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Webb, Judson Chambers, 1936- CII:J Mechanism, mentalism, and metamathematics. (Synthese library; v. 137) Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Metamathematics. I. Title. QA9.8.w4 510: 1 79-27819 ISBN 978-90-481-8357-9 ISBN 978-94-015-7653-6 (eBook) DOl 10.1007/978-94-015-7653-6 All Rights Reserved Copyright © 1980 by Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht Originally published by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland in 1980. Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1980 No part of the material protected by this copyright notice may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any informational storage and retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owner TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE vii INTRODUCTION ix CHAPTER I / MECHANISM: SOME HISTORICAL NOTES I. Machines and Demons 2. Machines and Men 17 3. Machines, Arithmetic, and Logic 22 CHAPTER II / MIND, NUMBER, AND THE INFINITE 33 I. The Obligations of Infinity 33 2. Mind and Philosophy of Number 40 3. Dedekind's Theory of Arithmetic 46 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Aesthetic Formalism, Reactions and Solutions
    Hekmat va Falsafe (Wisdom and Philosophy) vol.6, no.4, 2011, pp. 101-112 Aesthetic Formalism, Reactions and Solutions Khosrow Bagheri Noaparast Mohammad Zoheir Bagheri Noaparast Abstract It seems necessary to introduce the basic concepts used in this article i.e. formalism, anti-formalism and moderate formalism. Formalists believe that the aesthetic appreciation of an artwork generally involves an attentive awareness of its sensory or perceptual qualities and does not require knowledge about its non-perceptual properties. Anti-formalists on the other hand hold that none of the aesthetic properties in a work of art are formal. A number of philosophers have recently advocated a more moderate formalism. According to this view, although not all aesthetic qualities are formal, many are, and some artworks possess only formal aesthetic qualities. The quarrel among these three rival views concerns what sort of knowledge, if any, is required for appropriate aesthetic appreciation of an artwork. In what follows, we will give a brief exposition of these three viewpoints. Subsequently, we will give our preferred position with regard to these views. Keywords: Aesthetic formalism, anti-formalism, aesthetics, Nick Zangwill. 101 1. Formalism, anti-formalism and moderate formalism Before getting involved with the details of the three viewpoints, it seems necessary to introduce the notions of aesthetic and non-aesthetic properties and formal and non- formal properties. Observable properties are properties that can make a difference in our perceptual experience of the artwork. In contrast, non-observable properties refer to instances such as the artist‟s intention, the artist‟s love life, the artist‟s mental health, the artwork‟s history.
    [Show full text]
  • A Formalism for Argument Over Rules of Inference
    Tenacious Tortoises: A Formalism for Argument over Rules of Inference Peter McBurney and Simon Parsons Department of Computer Science University of Liverpool Liverpool L69 7ZF U.K. g fP.J.McBurney,S.D.Parsons @csc.liv.ac.uk May 31, 2000 Abstract Eighty years later, philosopher Susan Haack [9] took up the question of how one justifies the use of MP as a As multi-agent systems proliferate and employ different deductive rule of inference. If one does so by means of and more sophisticated formal logics, it is increasingly examples of its valid application, then this is in essence likely that agents will be reasoning with different rules a form of induction, which (as she remarks) seems too of inference. Hence, an agent seeking to convince an- weak a means of justification for a rule of deduction. If, other of some proposition may first have to convincethe on the other hand, one uses a deductive means of justi- latter to use a rule of inference which it has not thus far fication, such as demonstrating the preservation of truth adopted. We define a formalism to represent degrees across the inference step in a truth-table, one risks us- of acceptability or validity of rules of inference, to en- ing the very rule being justified. So how can one person able autonomous agents to undertake dialogue concern- convince another of the validity of a rule of deductive ing inference rules. Even when they disagree over the inference? acceptability of a rule, two agents may still use the pro- That rules of inference may be the subject of fierce posed formalism to reason collaboratively.
    [Show full text]
  • Dirty Hands: the One and the Many Charles Blattberg Professor Of
    Dirty Hands: The One and the Many Charles Blattberg Professor of Political Philosophy Université de Montréal The problem of “dirty hands” has appeared in the literature of political philosophy only relatively recently. No doubt this is connected to the fact that, as Alasdair MacIntyre points out, far more has been written on the theme of moral dilemmas in the past fifty years or so than in all the time from Plato until then.1 Talk of dirty hands, after all, is the application of this theme to politics. Listen to what Hoederer, in Sartre’s play of the same name, has to say about it: How you cling to your purity, young man! How afraid you are to soil your hands! All right, stay pure! What good will it do? Why did you join us? Purity is an idea for a yogi or a monk. You intellectuals and bourgeois anarchists use it as a pretext for doing nothing. To do nothing, to remain motionless, arms at your sides, wearing kid gloves. Well, I have dirty hands. Right up to the elbows. I’ve plunged them in filth and blood. But what do you hope? Do you think you can govern innocently?2 Hoederer’s last question can apply not only to the matter of ongoing governance but also to crisis situations such as the “ticking time bomb” scenario, which has become prominent in the literature. Imagine you’re a well-meaning elected political leader and your security forces have captured a terrorist. He knows the location of a recently planted bomb but he refuses to divulge it.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS Professor Dermot Moran Phd, Dlitt
    Dermot Moran Conference Presentations 1979–2016 CONFERENCE PRESENTATIONS Professor Dermot Moran PhD, DLitt, MRIA Full Professor of Philosophy (Chair of Metaphysics & Logic) University College Dublin Updated Saturday, June 11, 2016 [214 Conference Presentations since 1979] 2016 1. Dermot Moran, Workshop on Phenomenology of Anxiety, Marie Curie, Newman House, Dublin [4th November 2016] 2. Dermot Moran, Exexutive Committee Member, 55th Annual SPEP Conference, Utah Valley University, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [20-23 October 2016] 3. “Hermeneutics of the Body,” Invited Speaker, North American Society for Philosophical Hermeneutics (NASPH), 55th Annual SPEP Conference, Utah Valley University, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA [20 October 2016] 4. Dermot Moran, Keynote Speaker, Conference on Plotinus and Neoplatonism: Continuing Influence and Contemporary Relevance, Rochester Institute of Technology, 16-18 October 2016 [16 October 2016] 5. Dermot Moran, Committee Member, Meeting of Programme Committee, 24th World Congress of Philosophy, Peking University, Beijing 3-5 September 2016 6. Dermot Moran, Plenary Speaker, World Congress in Philosophy: “The Philosophy of Aristotle”, School of Philosophy, National & Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece, 9-15 July 2016. 7. Dermot Moran, Phenomenology Summer School in Venice, DIPARTIMENTO DI FILOSOFIA E BENI CULTURALI/ Venice, Italy, 10-15 July 2016 [http://www.phenomenologyinvenice.com] 8. Dermot Moran, Commentator on Jacob Rump, ‘Sense and Significance in the Later Husserl’, 46th Meeting of the Husserl Circle, Loyola University Chicago, 15-18 June 2016 [Wed 15 June 2016] 9. Dermot Moran, President, Steering Committee Meeting, Comité Directeur, Réunion, Université Houphouët-Boigny d'Abidjan-Cocody, Abidjan, Ivory Coast, Africa [Friday 3rd & Saturday 4 June 2016] 1 Dermot Moran Conference Presentations 1979–2016 10.
    [Show full text]
  • The Place of Formalism in Legal Theory, 70 N.C
    NORTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW Volume 70 | Number 5 Article 4 6-1-1992 The lP ace of Formalism in Legal Theory Michael Corrado Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Michael Corrado, The Place of Formalism in Legal Theory, 70 N.C. L. Rev. 1545 (1992). Available at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol70/iss5/4 This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Carolina Law Review by an authorized administrator of Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ESSAY THE PLACE OF FORMALISM IN LEGAL THEORY MICHAEL CORRADO* I understand formalism to be the claim that law is an autonomous area of knowledge. To say that it is autonomous is to say that it is self- contained, that it is not dependent on other areas of knowledge like mo- rality or politics or sociology. In particular it is to say that law is not reducible to those other areas, in a sense of reducibility I will try to make clear. There is a version of formalism that is true. This version of formal- ism does not claim that law is unrelated to other areas of knowledge. It admits that legal argument makes use of moral, political, and sociologi- cal information. But it insists that, although much that is extra-legal is taken into account in deciding a question of law, it remains extra-legal; it does not become part of the law.' I.
    [Show full text]
  • What Does It Mean to Say That Logic Is Formal?
    WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT LOGIC IS FORMAL? by John Gordon MacFarlane A.B., Philosophy, Harvard College, 1991 M.A., Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 1994 M.A., Classics, University of Pittsburgh, 1997 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2000 i Robert Brandom, Distinguished Service Professor of Philosophy (Director) Nuel Belnap, Alan Ross Anderson Distinguished Professor of Philosophy (Second Reader) Joseph Camp, Professor of Philosophy Danielle Macbeth, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Haverford College (Outside Reader) Kenneth Manders, Associate Professor of Philosophy Gerald Massey, Distinguished Service Professor of Philosophy ii WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT LOGIC IS FORMAL? John Gordon MacFarlane, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2000 Much philosophy of logic is shaped, explicitly or implicitly, by the thought that logic is distinctively formal and abstracts from material content. The distinction between formal and material does not appear to coincide with the more familiar contrasts between a pri- ori and empirical, necessary and contingent, analytic and synthetic—indeed, it is often invoked to explain these. Nor, it turns out, can it be explained by appeal to schematic inference patterns, syntactic rules, or grammar. What does it mean, then, to say that logic is distinctively formal? Three things: logic is said to be formal (or “topic-neutral”) (1) in the sense that it provides constitutive norms for thought as such, (2) in the sense that it is indifferent to the particular identities of objects, and (3) in the sense that it abstracts entirely from the semantic content of thought.
    [Show full text]