Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Church's argument can be revised so that it does not rely... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Church's argument is not beholden to classical logic, because it can be revised to be compatible with containment-logical principles

    Church's argument can be revised so that it does not rely on the principle that B alone logically entails A∨B

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility3 linked

    Related

    A revised version of Church's argument is compatible with containment-logical pr...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Church's argument is not beholden to classical logic, because it can be revised ...
    Containment logics reject the principle that B alone logically entails A∨B for a...

    Similar

    Containment logics reject the principle that B alone logically entails...81%Church's argument is not beholden to classical logic, because it can b...80%A revised version of Church's argument is compatible with containment-...78%If an argument's logical principle invalidates widely accepted and unc...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: church
    View source passageHide passage
    It is worth mentioning that the foregoing argument may seem to depend crucially on a somewhat contested feature of classical propositional logic. The argument appeals to the principle that if \(A \lor B\) logically entails \(C\), then \(B\) alone logically entails \(C\). But this in turn rests on the principle that \(B\) alone logically entails \(A \lor B\), for any \(A\), and this principle is rejected by so-called containment logics (for which see §3.1 of the entry on connexive logic). Howev

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective