This collection of essays examines logic and its philosophy. The author investigates the nature of logic not only by describing its properties but also by showing philosophical applications of logical concepts and structures. He evaluates what logic is and analyzes among other aspects the relations of logic and language, the status of identity, bivalence, proof, truth, constructivism, and metamathematics. With examples concerning the application of logic to philosophy, he also covers semantic loops, the epistemic discourse, the normative discourse, paradoxes, properties of truth, truth-making as well as theology, being and logical determinism. The author concludes with a philosophical reflection on nothingness and its modelling.
XV. An Analysis of Logical Determinism
XVAn Analysis of Logical Determinism30
The problem addressed in this paper goes back to Aristotle and his considerations about tomorrow’s sea battle. In a famous passage in (De Interpretatione 19a 25–30; after (The Works of Aristotle, vol. 1: Categoriae and De Intepretatione, tr. By E. M. Edghill, Oxford University Press, Oxford 1928), the Stagirite says:
Everything must be either be or not be, whether in the present or in the future, but it is not always possible to distinguish and state determinately which of these alternatives must necessarily come about.
Let me illustrate. A sea-fight must take place to-morrow or not, but it is not necessary that it either should not take place to-morrow, neither it is necessary that it should not take place, yet it is necessary that it either should or should not take place to-morrow. Since propositions correspond with facts, it is evident that when in future events there is a real alternative, and a potentiality in contrary directions, the corresponding affirmation and denial have the same character.
These words initiated a considerable and long discussion (for historical information and substantial assessments see Bernstein 1992; Cahn 1967; Gaskin 1995; Hintikka 1977; Jordan 1963; Karpenko 1990; Lucas 1989; Vuellimin 1996; Zagzebski 1991, Rice 2013). Basically, two problems were discussed. The first question was historical and concerned how Aristotle should be interpreted. Did he revise logic or not? His text, literally understood, not only defends the...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.