Scholarlink

<p>In <i>Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence</i> (Cambridge University Press, 2023), Erik Stei argues for logical monism, the view that there is exactly one correct logic, in opposition to logical pluralism and logical nihilism. The present review aims to challenge two premisses in the main argument of the volume. First, Stei argues that no version of pluralism based on a plurality of senses of the logical connectives succeeds in proving that logical vocabulary is genuinely plural in the required sense. Second, he also argues that pluralism cannot account for the rivalry between logics, which makes the position less charitable than it claims. I will give arguments against the two premisses after presenting the details of the main argument for monism that we find in the book.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Reflections on language and charity: a response to Stei’s “Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence”

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月9日

查看全文
  • Pilar Terrés-Villalonga

摘要

In Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence (Cambridge University Press, 2023), Erik Stei argues for logical monism, the view that there is exactly one correct logic, in opposition to logical pluralism and logical nihilism. The present review aims to challenge two premisses in the main argument of the volume. First, Stei argues that no version of pluralism based on a plurality of senses of the logical connectives succeeds in proving that logical vocabulary is genuinely plural in the required sense. Second, he also argues that pluralism cannot account for the rivalry between logics, which makes the position less charitable than it claims. I will give arguments against the two premisses after presenting the details of the main argument for monism that we find in the book.