Abstract
The requirement of proof-theoretic harmony has played a pivotal role in a number of debates in the philosophy of logic. Different authors have attempted to precisify the notion in different ways. Among these, three proposals have been prominent in the literature: harmony–as–conservative extension, harmony–as–leveling procedure, and Tennant’s harmony–as–deductive equilibrium. In this paper I propose to clarify the logical relationships between these accounts. In particular, I demonstrate that what I call the equivalence conjecture—that these three notions essentially come to the same thing—is erroneous.
Item Type: | Journal article |
---|---|
Form of publication: | Preprint |
Faculties: | Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Science > Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy (MCMP) Philosophy, Philosophy of Science and Religious Science > Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy (MCMP) > Logic |
Subjects: | 100 Philosophy and Psychology > 100 Philosophy |
Language: | English |
Item ID: | 23188 |
Date Deposited: | 04. Mar 2015, 14:56 |
Last Modified: | 03. Mar 2017, 10:53 |