Event Detail

Logic is often regarded as a neutral arbiter between substantive theories in science and metaphysics. Neutrality is also invoked as a criterion for deciding whether to count a truth as a logical truth. The lecture will argue that logic is much more like other branches of science than such a view allows. An alternative will be developed based on Tarski’s account of logical consequence. In particular, an abductive methodology will be explained for assessing proposals to revise logic; it uses standard criteria for scientific theory choice.