The Open UniversitySkip to content
 

A Normative Argument Against Explosion

Pinder, Mark (2017). A Normative Argument Against Explosion. Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 6(1) pp. 61–70.

Full text available as:
[img]
Preview
PDF (Accepted Manuscript) - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Download (486kB) | Preview
DOI (Digital Object Identifier) Link: https://doi.org/10.1002/tht3.234
Google Scholar: Look up in Google Scholar

Abstract

One strategy for defending paraconsistent logics involves raising ‘normative arguments’ against the inference rule explosion. Florian Steinberger systematically criticises a wide variety of formulations of such arguments. I argue that, for one such formulation, Steinberger's criticisms fail. I then sketch an argument, available to those who deny dialetheism, in defence of the formulation in question.

Item Type: Journal Item
Copyright Holders: 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc and the Northern Institute of Philosophy
ISSN: 2161-2234
Keywords: Paraconsistent logic; Explosion; Normative; Reason; Bridge principle
Academic Unit/School: Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies > Philosophy
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS) > Social Sciences and Global Studies
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS)
Item ID: 56632
Depositing User: Mark Pinder
Date Deposited: 18 Sep 2018 13:46
Last Modified: 06 Aug 2019 09:31
URI: http://oro.open.ac.uk/id/eprint/56632
Share this page:

Metrics

Altmetrics from Altmetric

Citations from Dimensions

Download history for this item

These details should be considered as only a guide to the number of downloads performed manually. Algorithmic methods have been applied in an attempt to remove automated downloads from the displayed statistics but no guarantee can be made as to the accuracy of the figures.

Actions (login may be required)

Policies | Disclaimer

© The Open University   contact the OU