Abstract
AbstractIs logic normative for belief? A standard approach to answering this question has been to investigate bridge principles relating claims of logical consequence to norms for belief. Although the question is naturally an epistemic one, bridge principles have typically been investigated in isolation from epistemic debates over the correct norms for belief. In this paper we tackle the question of whether logic is normative for belief by proposing a Kripkean model theory accounting for the interaction between logical, doxastic, epistemic and deontic notions and using this model theory to show which bridge principles are implied by epistemic norms that we have independent reason to accept, for example, the knowledge norm and the truth norm. We propose a preliminary theory of the interaction between logical, doxastic, epistemic and deontic notions that has among its commitments bridge principles expressing how logic is normative for belief. We also show how our framework suggests that logic is exceptionally normative.
Funder
Arts and Humanities Research Council
Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference68 articles.
1. Boult, C. (2019). Excuses, exemptions, and derivative norms. Ratio, 32(2), 150–158.
2. Broome, J. (2013). Rationality through reasoning. Wiley-Blackwell.
3. Brown, J. (2020). What is epistemic blame? Noûs, 54(2), 389–407.
4. Bykvist, K., & Hattiangadi, A. (2007). Does thought imply ought? Analysis, 67(4), 277–285.
5. Carnielli, W., & Coniglio, M. E. (2020). Combining logics. In E. N. Zalta, (Ed. )Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献