Workshop organized by
Typically, logical correctness is taken to concern whether or not an argument or proof follows a logical path from premises to conclusions. In recent years, however, such a view has been complicated by the proliferation of logics, approaches to logic, and uses of logic. In this workshop, we intend to discuss the philosophical and logical consequences of these changes with regard to how, or if, there is any sort of criteria by which a logical structure could be deemed correct, and whether or not those criteria are context-relevant in some specifiable manner.
There seems to be connections between all these three readings of correctness, to be centered around the criterion of a norm. But, while in the metalogical concept of correctness-as-soundness truth is something that is attributed or denied to sentences, with the logical concept of correctness-as-accuracy it deals with actions (also verbal actings) and allows gradations. As to the moral correctness, it refers to social norms and departs from the criterion of truth. A special emphasis is to be made on Dummett’s inferentialist explication of the concept “Boche”, in this respect: does such a logical explanation succeed in affording the meaning of such non-logical concepts?
Call for papers
We invite abstracts for papers dealing with any of the below topics (though not necessarily limited to them):
Contributed talks should not exceed a duration of 30 minutes including discussion. To submit a contribution, please send a one-page abstract by September 15, 2017 to: firstname.lastname@example.orgBack to the 6th Universal Logic Congress