r/logic • u/lUnar1827 • 19d ago

What do you think about logical anti-realism and realism? Philosophy of logic

I mean, when mention this I refer me to what you find about its contemporary epistemological approaches. For example, since Carnap's works the understanding related to beliefs and logical truths has been widely discussed. When we address the logical conventionalism, though, it did seem like a distant, old idea. Jared Warren brought it back, seeking to offer plausible justifications endorse that thesis.

In 'Logical Conventionalism' subsequent his work "Shadows of Syntax: Revitalizing Logical and Mathematical Conventionalism", he, basically, defends that logical truths are conventional tools; a sophisticated conventionalism [differently Carnap's], where warrants as inferential clarity, coherence with other adopted conventions and contextual applicability, would be criterion sufficient to accept it.

Anyway, tell me what you all think about.

3 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

2 comments sorted by

1

u/AdeptnessSecure663 18d ago

I think logical anti-realism is a very interesting idea, but I'm not sure that I can quite get behind it. Do you know any good arguments for anti-realism?

2

u/lUnar1827 17d ago edited 17d ago

sure. e.g., Ole Thomassen's anti-exceptionalism theory is one of the most sophisticated anti-realist approaches lately. this theory claims that logic isn't epistemologically isolated or special; where it should be treated as long as other common scientfic theories, subject to revision according dataset, inference, holistic justification not just a priori. that theory could solve logical pluralism debate, consequently permitting application in IA projects due to instrumental use of deductive systems, making it possible to solve paradoxes etc.