dc.creatorTajer, Diego
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-22T14:51:07Z
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-15T09:38:19Z
dc.date.available2021-09-22T14:51:07Z
dc.date.available2022-10-15T09:38:19Z
dc.date.created2021-09-22T14:51:07Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-21
dc.identifierTajer, Diego; The Normative Autonomy of Logic; Springer; Erkenntnis; 21-9-2020; 1-24
dc.identifier0165-0106
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/141161
dc.identifierCONICET Digital
dc.identifierCONICET
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/4371271
dc.description.abstractSome authors have called into question the normativity of logic, using as an argument that the bridge principles for logical normativity (MacFarlane, In what sense (in any) is logic normative for thought, 2004)? are just by-products of general epistemic principles for belief. In this paper, I discuss that suggestion from a formal point of view. I show that some important bridge principles can be derived from usual norms for belief. I also describe some possible ways to block this derivation by modifying the epistemic norms or weakening the bridge principles. Finally, I discuss different philosophical interpretations of these results.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10670-020-00321-5
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10670-020-00321-5
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subjectNormativity of Logic
dc.subjectBridge Principles
dc.subjectNormativity of Truth
dc.subjectEpistemic Logic
dc.titleThe Normative Autonomy of Logic
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución