摘要
为经典逻辑"实质蕴涵"联结词辩护,是化解"实质蕴涵怪论"的首要路径。辩护实质蕴涵的主要策略,可梳理为逻辑抽象策略、自然演绎策略、语用辩护策略以及新共性辩护策略。通过对这四大辩护策略的审视与比较分析可以发现:"强硬"的逻辑抽象策略、"迂回"的自然演绎策略以及语用辩护的"切割"策略都难以令人满意;而新共性辩护策略借由量化视角与蕴涵层级论成功地"取消"了众多怪论,为实质蕴涵进行了双重辩护。新共性辩护策略的成功为经典逻辑的普适性增添了新的注脚。
Defending for the connective of classical logic“material implication”is a primary path to solve the puzzle of the“material implication paradoxes”.The defense of material implication can be divided into four strategies:the strategy of logical abstractions,the strategy of natural deduction,the strategy of pragmatics as well as the strategy of new-commonness.By doing a critical discussion on these four strategies,our conclusions are:the strategies of logical abstractions,natural deduction and pragmatics are not successful.However,the strategy of new-commonness dissolves the paradoxes with the quantified logical perspective,and removes the conflicts between material implications and other implications by the hierarchy theory of implication.The success of the strategy of new-commonness lays a more solid foundation for the legitimacy and universality of classical logic.
出处
《河南社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2018年第2期102-106,共5页
Henan Social Sciences
关键词
实质蕴涵
实质蕴涵怪论
实质蕴涵辩护
蕴涵层级论
Material Implication
Material Implication Paradoxes
Defense for Material Implication
the Hierarchy Theory of Implication
