Journal of Philosophical Logic

, Volume 44, Issue 6, pp 793–803 | Cite as

The Justification of the Basic Laws of Logic

  • Gillian RussellEmail author

Take a correct sequent of formal logic, perhaps a simple logical truth, like the law of excluded middle, or something with premises, like disjunctive syllogism, but basically a claim of the form \({\Gamma } \vDash \phi \)


Logic Epistemology Analytic Quine Carnap Kripke 


  1. 1.
    Ayer, A.J. (1990/1936). Language, truth and logic. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beall, J., & Armour-Garb, B. (Eds.) (2004). Liars and heaps: New essays on paradox. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boghossian, P.A. (1996). Analyticity reconsidered. Nous, 30(3), 360–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burge, T. (1991/1979). Individualism and the mental. In D. Rosenthal (Ed.), The nature of the mind. (pp. 536–567). London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carnap, R. (1958). Empiricism, semantics and ontology, 2nd edn., (pp. 205–221). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glanzberg, M. (2004). A contextual-hierarchical approach to truth and the liar paradox. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 33, 27–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glanzberg, M. (2006). Quantifiers. In E. Lepore, & B. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of philosophy of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harman, G. (1986). Change in view. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hume, D. (1975/1748). In L. A. Selby-Bigge (Ed.) Enquiries concerning Human Understanding and Concerning the principles of morals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaplan, D. (1989). Demonstratives: An essay on the semantics, logic, metaphysics, and epistemology of demonstratives. In J. Almog, J. Perry, & H. Wettstein (Eds.) Themes from Kaplan. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kripke, S. A. (1980). Naming and necessity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martin, R.L. (1984). Introduction. In R. L. Martin (Ed.) Recent essays on truth and the liar paradox. (pp. 2–8). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Priest, G. (1987/2006). In contradiction, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Putnam, H. (1962). It ain’t necessarily so. Journal of Philosophy, 53, 658–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Quine, W.V.O. (1936). Truth by convention. In The Ways of Paradox and other essays, chapter 9. (pp. 70–99). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Quine, W.V.O. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review, 60, 20–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Quine, W.V.O. (1954). Carnap and logical truth. In The ways of Paradox and other essays, chapter 10. (pp. 100–125). New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quine, W. V. O. (1986). Philosophy of logic. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Russell, G. (2008). Truth in virtue of meaning: A defence of the analytic/synthetic distinction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Russell, G. (2012). Lessons from the logic of demonstratives: what indexicality teaches us about logic and vice versa. In G. Restall, & G. Russell (Eds.) New waves in philosophical logic. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Salmon, N. (1990). A milliam heir rejects the wages of sin. In C. A. Anderson, & J. Owens (Eds.), Propositional attitudes: Their role in logic, language, and mind. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Soames, S. (2003). Philosophical analysis in the twentieth century: The dawn of anlaysis, volume 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tarski, A. (1944). The semantic conception of truth: and the foundations of semantics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 4(3), 341–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyWashington University in St LouisSt LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations