Advertisement

Rescher’s Hypothetical Reasoning: An Amendment

  • Nuel D. BelnapJr.
Chapter
Part of the Philosophical Studies Series in Philosophy book series (PSSP, volume 15)

Abstract

1. Rescher 1964 — henceforth HR — proposes a way of reasoning from a set of hypotheses which may include both some of our beliefs and also hypotheses contradicting those beliefs. The aim of this paper is to point out what I take to be a fault in Rescher’s proposal, and to suggest a modification of it, using a nonclassical logic, which avoids that fault. The paper neither attacks nor defends the broader aspects of Rescher’s proposal, but merely assumes that it is at least prima facie worthwhile and therefore worthy of amendment; consequently, I shall try to tinker as little as possible. In particular, the use of a nonclassical logic which I propose does not. replace any use by HR of classical logic — in those places where Rescher is classical, I shall be classical, too. (Instead, the amendment introduces a nonclassical logic at a point where HR uses no logic at all.)

Keywords

Classical Logic Modal Category Relevance Logic Modal Family Innocent Bystander 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, Alan Ross and Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1963, First Degree Entailments.. Technical Report No. 10, Contract No. SAR/Nonr-609(16), Office of Naval Research, New Haven. Reprinted in Mathematischen Annalen., 149 (1963), pp. 302–319.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, Alan Ross and Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1963, First Degree Entailments.. Technical Report No. 10, Contract No. SAR/Nonr-609(16), Office of Naval Research, New Haven. Reprinted in Mathematischen Annalen., 149 (1963), pp. 302–319.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, Alan Ross and Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1963, First Degree Entailments.. Technical Report No. 10, Contract No. SAR/Nonr-609(16), Office of Naval Research, New Haven. Reprinted in Mathematischen Annalen., 149 (1963), pp. 302–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, Alan Ross and Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1975, Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity., Volume 1. Princeton (Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  5. Angell, Richard B., 1976, ‘Derivations in the logical system, AC, and its relationships to certain other systems.’ Mimeographed.Google Scholar
  6. Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1977a, ‘How a computer should think,’ G. Ryle (ed.), Contemporary Aspects of Philosophy., Stocksfield (Oriel Press), pp. 30–56.Google Scholar
  7. Belnap, Nuel D., Jr., 1977b, ‘A useful four-valued logic,’ in George Epstein and J. Michael Dunn (eds.), Modern Uses of Multiple-valued Logic., Dordrecht (D. Reidel ).Google Scholar
  8. Collier, Kenneth W., Gasper, Ann and Wolf, Robert G. 197+, Proceedings of the International Conference on Relevance Logics. In Memoriam: Alan Ross Anderson.. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  9. Fitch, Frederic B. 1952, Symbolic Logic., New York (The Ronald Press Company).Google Scholar
  10. Parry, William Tuthill 1933, ‘Ein Axiomsystem fur eine neue Art von Implikation (analytische Implikation),’ Ergebenisse eines mathematischen Kolloguiums. 4, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar
  11. Rescher, Nicholas 1964, Hypothetical Reasoning., Amsterdam (North-Holland Publishing Company).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nuel D. BelnapJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations