Abstract
This article identifies problems with regard to providing criteria that regulate the matching of logical formulae and natural language. We then take on to solve these problems by defining a necessary and sufficient criterion of adequate formalization. On the basis of this criterion we argue that logic should not be seen as an ars iudicandi capable of evaluating the validity or invalidity of informal arguments, but as an ars explicandi that renders transparent the formal structure of informal reasoning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blau U. (1977). Die dreiwertige Logik der Sprache. de Gruyter, Berlin
Brun G. (2004) Die richtige Formel, Philosophische Probleme der logischen Formalisierung. Ontos, Frankfurt a.M.
Carnap R. (1971). The logical foundations of probability. Routledge, London
Chomsky N. (1977). Essays on form and interpretation. Amsterdam, North-Holland
Chomsky N. (1986). Knowledge of language. Praeger, New York
Davidson D. (1967) The logical form of action sentences. In: Rescher N. (eds). The logic of decision and action. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 81–95
Davidson D. (1980). Essays on actions and events. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Davidson D. (1984). Inquiries into truth and interpretation. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Epstein R.L. (1990). The semantic foundations of logic: Propositional logic. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Epstein R.L. (1994). The semantic foundations of logic: Predicate logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Goodman N. (1983). Fact, fiction, and forecast (4th ed). Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Hoyningen-Huene P. (1998) Formale Logik. Reclam, Stuttgart
Jackson B. (2007). Beyond logical form. Philosophical Studies 132: 347–380
Lampert, T. (2000). Wittgensteins Physikalismus. Paderborn: Mentis.
Lampert T. (2006). Explaining formulae of first order logic. Ruch Filozoficzny, LXIII.3: 459–480
Lampert, T., & Baumgartner, M. The unity of logical form. (unpublished).
Link G. (1979) Montague-Grammatik. Wilhelm Fink Verlag, München
Löffler, W. (2006). Spielt die rhethorische Qualität von Argumenten eine Rolle bei deren logischer Analyse? Überlegungen zum Verhältnis von Argumentationstheorie und formaler Logik. In G. Kreuzbauer & G. Dorn (Eds.), Argumentation in Theorie und Praxis (Salzburger Beiträge zu Rhetorik und Argumentationstheorie, Band 1) (pp. 115–130). Wien: LIT.
Massey G.J. (1975). Are there any good arguments that bad arguments are bad?. Philosophy in Context 4: 61–77
Montague R. (1974a) Quantification in ordinary language. In: Thomason R.H. (eds). Formal philosophy: Selected papers of Richard Montague. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 247–270
Montague R. (1974b) Universal grammar. In: Thomason R.H. (eds). Formal philosophy: Selected papers of Richard Montague. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp. 222–246
Montague R., Thomason R.H. (ed) (1974). Formal philosophy: Selected papers of Richard Montague. Yale University Press, New Haven
Neale S. (1994) Logical form and LF. In: Otero C.P. (eds). Noam Chomsky. Critical assessments. Routledge, London, pp. 788–838
Quine W.v.O. (1953). Mr. Strawson on logical theory. Mind 62: 433–451
Rawls J. (1980). A theory of justice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Read S. (1994). Formal and material consequence. Journal of Philosophical Logic 23: 247–265
Sainsbury R.M. (1991) Logical forms (2nd ed). Blackwell, Oxford
Strawson P.F. (1952). Introduction to logical theory. Methuen, London
Wittgenstein L. (1995) Tractatus logico-philosophicus. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Baumgartner, M., Lampert, T. Adequate formalization. Synthese 164, 93–115 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9218-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-007-9218-1