Intuitionism Reconsidered

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The debate between intuitionists and classical logicians is fought on two fronts. First, there is the battle over subject matter-the disputants disagree regarding which mathematical structures are legitimate domains of inquiry. Second, there is the battle over logic-they disagree over which algebraic structure correctly codifies logical consequence. In this article the emphasis is on the latter issue-it focuses on what the correct (formal) account of correct inference might look like, and, given such an account, how we should understand disagreements regarding the extension of the logical consequence relation. In the next two sections of the article, two typical sorts of arguments for intuitionistic logic are examined. The article then examines exactly what is at stake when one provides a logic as an account of logical consequence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationThe Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
PublisherOxford University Press
ISBN (Electronic)9780199892082
ISBN (Print)9780195325928
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2 2009
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2005 by Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords

  • Classical logic
  • Inference
  • Intuitionism
  • Intuitionistic logic
  • Logical consequence
  • Mathematical structures

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intuitionism Reconsidered'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this