Skip to main content

An Empirical Route to Logical ‘Conventionalism’

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logic, Rationality, and Interaction (LORI 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10455))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The laws of classical logic are taken to be logical truths, which in turn are taken to hold objectively. However, we might question our faith in these truths: why are they true? One general approach, proposed by Putnam [8] and more recently Dickson [3] or Maddy [5], is to adopt empiricism about logic. On this view, logical truths are true because they are true of the world alone – this gives logical truths an air of objectivity. Putnam and Dickson both take logical truths to be true in virtue of the world’s structure, given by our best empirical theory, quantum mechanics. This assumes a determinate logical structure of the world given by quantum mechanics. Here, I argue that this assumption is false, and that the world’s logical structure, and hence the related ‘true’ logic, are underdetermined. This leads to what I call empirical conventionalism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Warren [12], p. 120.

  2. 2.

    Quine [9] remains the starting point against explicit conventionalism. However, see [12] who argues for implicit conventionalism.

  3. 3.

    Maddy [5], p. 226.

  4. 4.

    Putnam [8], p. 179.

  5. 5.

    Dickson [3], p. 2.

  6. 6.

    The span of two subspaces is the plane containing them and their superpositions.

  7. 7.

    Maudlin [6], p. 479.

  8. 8.

    Bacciagaluppi [1], p. 19.

  9. 9.

    Dickson [3], p. 4.

  10. 10.

    For an exposition of the logical behavior of ‘⋁QL’, see Humberstone [4], pp. 913-917.

  11. 11.

    See Bohm [2].

  12. 12.

    Bacciagaluppi [1], p. 31.

  13. 13.

    For more on decoherence or the status of ‘worlds’ in EM, see Wallace [11].

  14. 14.

    Sklar [10], p. 958.

  15. 15.

    Putnam [7], p. 33.

References

  1. Bacciagaluppi, G.: Is Logic Empirical? (2009). http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/3380/. Accessed 13 June 2017

  2. Bohm, D.: A suggested interpretation of the quantum theory in terms of “hidden” variables I. Phys. Rev. 85(2), 166–179 (1952)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Dickson, M.: Quantum Logic Is Alive ∧ (It Is True ∨ It Is False) (2001). http://mdickson.net/pubs/Quantum_Logic.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2017

  4. Humberstone, L.: The Connectives. MIT Press, Cambridge (2011)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Maddy, P.: Second Philosophy: A Naturalistic Method. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Maudlin, T.: Distilling metaphysics from quantum physics. In: Loux, M., Zimmerman, D. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics, pp. 461–487. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Putnam, H.: The refutation of conventionalism. Noûs 8(1), 25–40 (1974)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Putnam, H.: The Logic of Quantum Mechanics”, in Mathematics, Matter and Method, vol. 1, pp. 174–197. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1975)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Quine, W.V.O.: Truth by convention. In: Benacerraf, P., Putnam, H. (eds.) Philosophy of Mathematics: Selected Readings, 2nd edn., pp. 329–354. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sklar, L.: Spacetime and conventionalism. Philos. Sci. 71(5), 950–959 (2004)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Wallace, D.: Decoherence and Ontology (or: How I learned to stop worrying and love FAPP). In: Saunders, S., Barrett, J., Kent, A., Wallace, D. (eds.) Many Worlds?: Everett, Quantum Theory & Reality, pp. 53–72. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Warren, J.: Revisiting quine on truth by convention. J. Philos. Log. 46(2), 119–139 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eugene Chua .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chua, E. (2017). An Empirical Route to Logical ‘Conventionalism’. In: Baltag, A., Seligman, J., Yamada, T. (eds) Logic, Rationality, and Interaction. LORI 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10455. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55665-8_43

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55665-8_43

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-55664-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-55665-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics