The Research Seminar Series in Philosophy invites you to a seminar with Alex Sandgren who will speak on the topic of 'Validity not "Validity"'.
Kocurek and Jerzak (2020) have recently defended the view, motivated by recent work by Kouri Kissel (2018,2019), that the only non-trivial reading of counterlogicals like (1) is a counterconventional reading according to which the antecedent triggers a shift in the interpretation of the logical vocabulary in the consequent.
(1) If intuitionistic logic were correct, double negation elimination would be invalid.
I want to raise a problem for this view and use it to shed light the nature of logical disagreement and the subject matter of logical discourse. In a nutshell, the problem is that some counterlogical antecedents concern the status of logical facts themselves and, in particular, how logical facts relate to logical our vocabulary. These counterlogicals resist counterconventional interpretations. I will argue that this difficulty points to a number of broader problems with the views and arguments that motivate Kocurek and Jerzak's approach, most importantly the view called 'logical expressivism' and Quine's 'changing the subject' objection to non-classical logic.
All interested are welcome to participate in this seminar.
This seminar is held online in Zoom. Link for participation will be distributed by email to the seminar distribution list. If you wish to participate but are not on this list you can get the link by contacting Pär Sundström, see below.