La lógica y sus aplicaciones: ¿platonismo o no-platonismo?

Translated title of the contribution: Logic and its applications: Platonism or non-platonism?

Otávio Bueno, Melisa Vivanco

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In this paper, we examine two conceptions of the application of logic and assess their comparative merits. The first is a platonist monist conception that characterizes the logical consequence relation as an abstract relation among propositions. We argue that this proposal, which insists on logic’s topic neutrality, accommodates very well the objectivity of logic. From this perspective, there are no constraints from particular topics. As a result, we have the universality that allows us going through a wide scope of contexts where logic is applied. In contrast, a non-platonist pluralist conception is examined and it characterizes the variety of logical consequence relations as something concrete, context-dependent involved in particular cases, and topic dependent. As will become clear, this conception is particularly well suited to make room for the applications of logic. We conclude that, in order to solve the ontological debate about logic, we need to go beyond its applications.

Original languageSpanish
Pages (from-to)19-41
Number of pages23
JournalAndamios
Volume16
Issue number41
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2019

Fingerprint

neutrality
objectivity
Platonism
Logic
Conception
Logical Consequence
Consequence Relation
Wide-scope
Ontological
Objectivity
Monist
Pluralist
Merit
Platonist
Universality
Neutrality

Keywords

  • Application of logic
  • Logical consequence
  • Logical pluralism
  • Non-classical logics
  • Platonism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

La lógica y sus aplicaciones : ¿platonismo o no-platonismo? / Bueno, Otávio; Vivanco, Melisa.

In: Andamios, Vol. 16, No. 41, 01.09.2019, p. 19-41.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bueno, Otávio ; Vivanco, Melisa. / La lógica y sus aplicaciones : ¿platonismo o no-platonismo?. In: Andamios. 2019 ; Vol. 16, No. 41. pp. 19-41.
@article{ee4fb2c2a6ad42639bbbead17a999ac2,
title = "La l{\'o}gica y sus aplicaciones: ¿platonismo o no-platonismo?",
abstract = "In this paper, we examine two conceptions of the application of logic and assess their comparative merits. The first is a platonist monist conception that characterizes the logical consequence relation as an abstract relation among propositions. We argue that this proposal, which insists on logic’s topic neutrality, accommodates very well the objectivity of logic. From this perspective, there are no constraints from particular topics. As a result, we have the universality that allows us going through a wide scope of contexts where logic is applied. In contrast, a non-platonist pluralist conception is examined and it characterizes the variety of logical consequence relations as something concrete, context-dependent involved in particular cases, and topic dependent. As will become clear, this conception is particularly well suited to make room for the applications of logic. We conclude that, in order to solve the ontological debate about logic, we need to go beyond its applications.",
keywords = "Application of logic, Logical consequence, Logical pluralism, Non-classical logics, Platonism",
author = "Ot{\'a}vio Bueno and Melisa Vivanco",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.29092/uacm.v16i41.713",
language = "Spanish",
volume = "16",
pages = "19--41",
journal = "Andamios",
issn = "1870-0063",
publisher = "Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico",
number = "41",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - La lógica y sus aplicaciones

T2 - ¿platonismo o no-platonismo?

AU - Bueno, Otávio

AU - Vivanco, Melisa

PY - 2019/9/1

Y1 - 2019/9/1

N2 - In this paper, we examine two conceptions of the application of logic and assess their comparative merits. The first is a platonist monist conception that characterizes the logical consequence relation as an abstract relation among propositions. We argue that this proposal, which insists on logic’s topic neutrality, accommodates very well the objectivity of logic. From this perspective, there are no constraints from particular topics. As a result, we have the universality that allows us going through a wide scope of contexts where logic is applied. In contrast, a non-platonist pluralist conception is examined and it characterizes the variety of logical consequence relations as something concrete, context-dependent involved in particular cases, and topic dependent. As will become clear, this conception is particularly well suited to make room for the applications of logic. We conclude that, in order to solve the ontological debate about logic, we need to go beyond its applications.

AB - In this paper, we examine two conceptions of the application of logic and assess their comparative merits. The first is a platonist monist conception that characterizes the logical consequence relation as an abstract relation among propositions. We argue that this proposal, which insists on logic’s topic neutrality, accommodates very well the objectivity of logic. From this perspective, there are no constraints from particular topics. As a result, we have the universality that allows us going through a wide scope of contexts where logic is applied. In contrast, a non-platonist pluralist conception is examined and it characterizes the variety of logical consequence relations as something concrete, context-dependent involved in particular cases, and topic dependent. As will become clear, this conception is particularly well suited to make room for the applications of logic. We conclude that, in order to solve the ontological debate about logic, we need to go beyond its applications.

KW - Application of logic

KW - Logical consequence

KW - Logical pluralism

KW - Non-classical logics

KW - Platonism

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074720204&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074720204&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.29092/uacm.v16i41.713

DO - 10.29092/uacm.v16i41.713

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85074720204

VL - 16

SP - 19

EP - 41

JO - Andamios

JF - Andamios

SN - 1870-0063

IS - 41

ER -