A Normative Argument Against Explosion
Pinder, Mark
(2017)
A Normative Argument Against Explosion.
Thought: A Journal of Philosophy, 6 (1).
pp. 61-70.
ISSN 2161-2234
One strategy for defending paraconsistent logics involves raising ‘normative arguments’ against the inference rule explosion. Florian Steinberger systematically criticises a wide variety of formulations of such arguments. I argue that, for one such formulation, Steinberger's criticisms fail. I then sketch an argument, available to those who deny dialetheism, in defence of the formulation in question.
Item Type | Article |
---|---|
Additional information | This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Mark Pinder, 'A Normative Argument Against Explosion', Thought, Vol. 6 (1): 61-70, March 2017, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tht3.234. Under embargo. Embargo end date: 3 February 2019. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the Northern Institute of Philosophy. |
Date Deposited | 15 May 2025 13:34 |
Last Modified | 31 May 2025 00:12 |