One Step is Enough

The recent development and exploration of mixed metainferential logics is a breakthrough in our understanding of nontransitive and nonreflexive logics. Moreover, this exploration poses a new challenge to theorists like me, who have appealed to similarities to classical logic in defending the logic ST, since some mixed metainferential logics seem to bear even more similarities to classical logic than ST does. There is a whole ST-based hierarchy, of which ST itself is only the first step, that seems to become more and more classical at each level. I think this seeming is misleading: for certain purposes, anyhow, metainferential hierarchies give us no reason to move on from ST. ST is indeed only the first step on a grand metainferential adventure; but one step is enough. This paper aims to explain and defend that claim. Along the way, I take the opportunity also to develop some formal tools and results for thinking about metainferential logics more generally.

[1]  Jonathan Georg Dittrich.  Paradox, arithmetic and nontransitive logic , 2020 .

[2]  H. Wansing,et al.  An Inferentially Many-Valued Two-Dimensional Notion of Entailment , 2017 .

[3]  Thoralf Skolem.  Studies on the axiom of comprehension , 1963, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[4]  Val Plumwood,et al.  The politics of reason: Towards a feminist logic , 1993 .

[5]  S. Haack.  Philosophy of logics , 1978 .

[6]  W. W. Tait,et al.  A nonconstructive proof of Gentzen’s Hauptsatz for second order predicate logic , 1966 .

[7]  Damian Szmuc,et al.  A Recovery operator for Nontransitive Approaches , 2020, Rev. Symb. Log..

[8]  Michael Tye,et al.  Sorites Paradoxes and the Semantics of Vagueness , 1994 .

[9]  Federico Matías Pailos,et al.  A FULLY CLASSICAL TRUTH THEORY CHARACTERIZED BY SUBSTRUCTURAL MEANS , 2019, The Review of Symbolic Logic.

[10]  Peter W. Woodruff,et al.  On representing ‘true-in-l’ in L , 1975 .

[11]  Th. Skolem,et al.  A Set Theory Based on a Certain 3-Valued Logic. , 1960 .

[12]  Chris Scambler,et al.  Classical Logic and the Strict Tolerant Hierarchy , 2020, J. Philos. Log..

[13]  Stefan Wintein.  On All Strong Kleene Generalizations of Classical Logic , 2016, Stud Logica.

[14]  Gary M. Hardegree,et al.  Algebraic Methods in Philosophical Logic , 2001 .

[15]  Emmanuel Chemla,et al.  Characterizing logical consequence in many-valued logic , 2017, J. Log. Comput..

[16]  Emmanuel Chemla,et al.  SUSZKO’S PROBLEM: MIXED CONSEQUENCE AND COMPOSITIONALITY , 2017, The Review of Symbolic Logic.

[17]  A. Weir.  A Robust Non-transitive Logic , 2015 .

[18]  P. Martin-Löf.  Constructive mathematics and computer programming , 1984 .

[19]  Jamie Tappenden,et al.  The liar and sorites paradoxes: Toward a unified treatment , 1993 .

[20]  John L. Bell,et al.  Set Theory: Boolean-Valued Models and Independence Proofs , 2005 .

[21]  R. Keefe.  Theories of vagueness , 2000 .

[22]  J. Girard.  Proof Theory and Logical Complexity , 1989 .

[23]  S. Haack.  Philosophy of logics , 1978 .

[24]  Giulia Terzian.  Norms of Truth and Logical Revision , 2015 .

[25]  Jon Barwise,et al.  Heterogeneous logic , 1996 .

[26]  Hartry Field.  Saving Truth From Paradox , 2008 .

[27]  Jc Beall,et al.  Possibilities and Paradox: An Introduction to Modal and Many-Valued Logic , 2003 .

[28]  Ryszard Wójcicki,et al.  Theory of Logical Calculi , 1988 .

[29]  Elia Zardini.  A Model of Tolerance , 2008, Stud Logica.

[30]  Federico Matias Pailos,et al.  A family of metainferential logics , 2019, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[31]  Toby Meadows.  Fixed Points for Consequence Relations , 2014 .

[32]  Richard Routley,et al.  Relevant logics and their rivals , 1982 .

[33]  Peter F. Strawson,et al.  Introduction To Logical Theory , 1954 .

[34]  Leon Horsten,et al.  Axiomatizing Kripke's theory of truth , 2006, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[35]  Albert Visser,et al.  Four valued semantics and the Liar , 1984, J. Philos. Log..

[36]  E. Chemla,et al.  From many-valued consequence to many-valued connectives , 2018, Synthese.

[37]  Kai von Fintel,et al.  NPI Licensing, Strawson Entailment, and Context Dependency , 1999, J. Semant..

[38]  Saul A. Kripke,et al.  Outline of a Theory of Truth , 1975 .

[39]  Michael Kremer.  Kripke and the logic of truth , 1988, J. Philos. Log..

[40]  Y. Sharvit.  A note on (Strawson) entailment , 2017 .

[41]  David Ripley,et al.  On the 'transitivity' of consequence relations , 2018, J. Log. Comput..

[42]  Hannes Leitgeb,et al.  Truth and the Liar in De Morgan-Valued Models , 1999, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[43]  Nicholas J. J. Smith.  Vagueness and Degrees of Truth , 2008 .

[44]  Damian Szmuc,et al.  A Hierarchy of Classical and Paraconsistent Logics , 2019, J. Philos. Log..

[45]  Anil Gupta,et al.  Truth and paradox , 1982, J. Philos. Log..

[46]  D. J. Shoesmith,et al.  Multiple-Conclusion Logic , 1978 .

[47]  David Ripley,et al.  Paradoxes and Failures of Cut , 2013 .

[48]  Kurt Schutte.  Syntactical and Semantical Properties of Simple Type Theory , 1960 .

[49]  Damian Szmuc,et al.  (Meta)inferential levels of entailment beyond the Tarskian paradigm , 2019, Synthese.

[50]  Carlo Nicolai,et al.  Principles for Object-Linguistic Consequence: from Logical to Irreflexive , 2018, J. Philos. Log..

[51]  Ross T. Brady.  The consistency of the axioms of abstraction and extensionality in a three-valued logic , 1971, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..