180226 SE Philosophy of Logic (2024W)
Logical Consequence
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Tu 24.09.2024 09:00 to Su 29.09.2024 23:59
- Deregistration possible until Su 10.11.2024 23:59
Details
max. 30 participants
Language: English
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
- N Friday 18.10. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 25.10. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 08.11. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 15.11. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 22.11. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 29.11. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 06.12. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 13.12. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 10.01. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 17.01. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 24.01. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
- Friday 31.01. 16:45 - 18:15 Hörsaal 2G, NIG Universitätsstraße 7/Stg. II/2.Stock, 1010 Wien
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
Assessment and permitted materials
-- Students are expected to attend and participate in seminars, a maximum of two unexcused absences are permitted.
-- Students will give an in-class presentation, of around 15 minutes on a topic connected with the theme of that class. Further details will be confirmed in class.
-- Students are also required to complete an initial paper proposal during the second half of the semester, circa. 500 words.
-- Students will also submit a final paper (5.000 to 6.500 words, including footnotes, references etc.).
-- Students will give an in-class presentation, of around 15 minutes on a topic connected with the theme of that class. Further details will be confirmed in class.
-- Students are also required to complete an initial paper proposal during the second half of the semester, circa. 500 words.
-- Students will also submit a final paper (5.000 to 6.500 words, including footnotes, references etc.).
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
I. Grading
An in-class presentation accounts for 25% of the course grade.
An initial paper proposal accounts for 10% of the course grade.
A term paper accounts for the remaining 65% of the grade.II. Criteria
Paper proposals are initial attempts to develop an idea. They are not expected to be polished or complete drafts, but to offer a sketch of how the paper will be developed and the intended arguments. Priority is given to the arguments and ideas comprised in the proposal.Term papers are assessed as pieces of academic philosophy. Clarity of exposition, strength of argument, and engagement with relevant literature are among the good-making features of a strong term paper. At this level, it is expected that students will be able to produce sustained pieces of well-argued philosophical prose that develop original insights.Presentations are assessed similarly with a particular emphasis on the successful communication of ideas. Students are expected to offer and engage with arguments but should do so in a way that respects the particular demands of oral communication.III. Passing Grade
In order to achieve a passing grade, students must pass each component of the course.IV. Required Background Knowledge
While this is a seminar on the philosophy of logic, familiarity with quantified logic is assumed. Students who have not passed introductory logic classes will struggle to grasp the material, to participate in discussions, and will have difficulty in completing the requisite assignments.
An in-class presentation accounts for 25% of the course grade.
An initial paper proposal accounts for 10% of the course grade.
A term paper accounts for the remaining 65% of the grade.II. Criteria
Paper proposals are initial attempts to develop an idea. They are not expected to be polished or complete drafts, but to offer a sketch of how the paper will be developed and the intended arguments. Priority is given to the arguments and ideas comprised in the proposal.Term papers are assessed as pieces of academic philosophy. Clarity of exposition, strength of argument, and engagement with relevant literature are among the good-making features of a strong term paper. At this level, it is expected that students will be able to produce sustained pieces of well-argued philosophical prose that develop original insights.Presentations are assessed similarly with a particular emphasis on the successful communication of ideas. Students are expected to offer and engage with arguments but should do so in a way that respects the particular demands of oral communication.III. Passing Grade
In order to achieve a passing grade, students must pass each component of the course.IV. Required Background Knowledge
While this is a seminar on the philosophy of logic, familiarity with quantified logic is assumed. Students who have not passed introductory logic classes will struggle to grasp the material, to participate in discussions, and will have difficulty in completing the requisite assignments.
Examination topics
I.
The topic of the presentation will be directly connected to the theme of that day's class. It is expected that the presentation will naturally advance/develop the issues under discussion that week. Students will have an opportunity to discuss the subject of their presentation in advance with the instructor.II.
The topic of the term paper and paper proposal should be related to the issues discussed in class. If in doubt, students should inquire with the instructor whether a particular topic is suitable. In the normal case, it is expected that the paper proposal will form the basis for the subsequent term paper, but this is not required and students will not be penalized for diverging from this model.(Note though that the paper proposal is a chance to get feedback on arguments/ideas, so it will generally be prudent for students to use it as an opportunity to test some of the claims they hope to make in their paper.)
The topic of the presentation will be directly connected to the theme of that day's class. It is expected that the presentation will naturally advance/develop the issues under discussion that week. Students will have an opportunity to discuss the subject of their presentation in advance with the instructor.II.
The topic of the term paper and paper proposal should be related to the issues discussed in class. If in doubt, students should inquire with the instructor whether a particular topic is suitable. In the normal case, it is expected that the paper proposal will form the basis for the subsequent term paper, but this is not required and students will not be penalized for diverging from this model.(Note though that the paper proposal is a chance to get feedback on arguments/ideas, so it will generally be prudent for students to use it as an opportunity to test some of the claims they hope to make in their paper.)
Reading list
Provisional Suggested Readings (more specific information & further readings will be provided in due course):John Etchemendy, The concept of logical consequence (1990)
Greg Ray, “Logical Consequence: A defense of Tarski”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, (1996).
Gillian Russell, “Logical Consequence (slight return), Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, (forthcoming).
Greg Ray, “Logical Consequence: A defense of Tarski”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, (1996).
Gillian Russell, “Logical Consequence (slight return), Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, (forthcoming).
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Th 17.10.2024 15:06
The aim of this course is to think more carefully about the nature of logical consequence and thereby to introduce students to research in the philosophy of logic.II. Contents
From one perspective, logic is the study of (logical) consequence, roughly speaking an inference-supporting relation that appears to hold between certain kinds of claims. In formal logic, we build languages equipped with a consequence relation (i.e. logics) to serve as models. We study the (metalogical) properties of these models and use this reflection to draw conclusions about the consequence relation. But we can also think about consequence more directly and more philosophically. It is this latter exercise with which we are concerned in this seminar.The heart of the course will be an extended and careful reading of Etchemendy’s book, The concept of logical consequence. The book offers a sustained criticism of a widely accepted account of logical consequence, first developed by Alfred Tarski. The basic intuition is that A is a consequence of B if and only if there are no cases where B is true and A false. The Tarskian account uses model-theory to develop this intuition: an argument is valid (i.e. the conclusion is a logical consequence of the argument’s premises) just in case there are no models in which its premises are true and its conclusions false. Etchemendy identifies two central problems in Tarski’s proposal: first (as Tarski himself recognized) it assumes a distinction between logical and non-logical expressions that is hard to precisify. Second, consequence seems to have a modal aspect: if A is a consequence of B, then if B is true, A must be true. In Tarski’s account, this necessity is replaced by universal quantification—A is a consequence of B, if A is always true (i.e. is true in all models) whenever B is. But being universally true and being necessarily true seem to be quite different things.This will occupy us for the first half of the course; subsequently we will turn to look at some critical responses to Etchemendy’s work. We will touch briefly on alternatives to semantic conceptions of logical consequence (like Tarski’s), the limitations and status of classical first-order logic, and on the nature of logicality.III. Methods
Teaching will involve seminar discussion, reading, etc.