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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Supervaluationism violates classical inference rules: und... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Supervaluationism is a respected theory of vagueness because indecision about meaning can be both intentional and functional.

    Supervaluationism violates classical inference rules: under supervaluational semantics, 'A or not-A' can be supertrue while neither 'A' nor 'not-A' is true.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Supervaluationism correctly models vagueness: borderline cases lack determinate truth-values, making classical bivalence inappropriate for vague predicates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Classical logic assumes a complete, determinate world; but vagueness is a genuine semantic phenomenon requiring non-classical frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The law of excluded middle ('A or not-A') can be supertrue without either disjunct being true, preserving logical validity at the metalevel.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If classical inference rules fail at the object level, supervaluationism undermines the distinction between validity and invalidity itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing 'truth' from 'supertruth' creates a hierarchy of semantic notions; ordinary logical reasoning operates at the basic truth level, not metalevel.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Vagueness can be adequately modeled using degree-theoretic semantics or epistemic approaches without abandoning classical logic's inference rules.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Classical logic assumes a complete, determinate world; but vagueness is a genuin...Distinguishing 'truth' from 'supertruth' creates a hierarchy of semantic notions...If classical inference rules fail at the object level, supervaluationism undermi...Supervaluationism correctly models vagueness: borderline cases lack determinate ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Supervaluationism is a respected theory of vagueness because indecision about me...The law of excluded middle ('A or not-A') can be supertrue without either disjun...Vagueness can be adequately modeled using degree-theoretic semantics or epistemi...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit