Abstract
Logic and philosophy of science share a long history, though contacts have gone through ups and downs. This paper is a brief survey of some major themes in logical studies of empirical theories, including links to computer science and current studies of rational agency. The survey has no new results: we just try to make some things into common knowledge.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Abramsky S. (2008) Information, processes and games. In: Adriaans P., van Benthem J. (eds) Handbook of the philosophy of information. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 483–549
Abramsky, S., & Coecke, B. (2004). A categorical semantics of quantum protocols. In Proceedings of LiCS‘04. CA: IEEE Computer Science Press.
Aiello, M., Pratt-Hartman, I., van Benthem, J. (eds) (2007) Handbook of spatial logics. Springer, Heidelberg
Aliseda A. (2006) Abductive reasoning: Logical investigations into discovery and explanation. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Andréka, H., Madarász, J., & Németi, I. (2007). Logic of space-time and relativity theory. In Handbook of spatial logics (pp. 607–711). Heidelberg: Springer.
Baltag, A., & Smets, S. (2008a). A dynamic-logical perspective on quantum behavior. In L. Horsten, & I. Douven (Eds.), Special issue on applied logic in the methodology of science. Studia Logica 89, 185–209.
Baltag A., Smets S. (2008b) A qualitative theory of dynamic interactive belief revision. In: Bonanno G., van der Hoek W., Wooldridge M. (eds) Texts in logic and games. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, pp 9–58
Baltag A., Smets S., Zvesper J. (2009) Keep ‘hoping’ for rationality: A solution to the backward induction paradox. Synthese 169(2): 301–333
Barendregt, H. (2008). Buddhist models of the mind and the common core thesis on mysticism. One hundred years of intuitionism (1907–2007) (pp. 131–145). Birkhäuser, Basel: Publications des Archives Henri-Poincaré.
Bergstra J., Heering J., Klint P. (1990) Module algebra. Journal of the ACM 37(2): 335–372
Beth E. W. (1948) Analyse Sémantique des Théories Physiques. Synthese 7: 206–207
Bod R. (2006) Towards a general model of applying science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 20(1): 5–25
Bolzano, B. (1837). Wissenschaftslehre. Sulzbach: Buchhandlung Seidel. Also appeared as Theory of science (R. George Trans.). Berkeley: University of California Press (1972).
Bressan A. (1972) A general interpreted modal calculus. Yale University Press, New Haven
Carnap R. (1928) Die Logische Aufbau der Welt. Felix Meiner Verlag, Leipzig
Craig W., Vaught R. (1958) Finite axiomatizability using additional predicates. Journal of Symbolic Logic 23: 289–308
Dalla Chiara M.-L. (1992) Quantum logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 57(2): 753–754
de Bruin, B. (2010). Explaining games: The epistemic programme in game theory. Synthese Library, Vol. 34. Dordrecht: Springer.
Dégrémont C., Gierasimczuk N. (2009) Can doxastic agents learn? On the temporal structure of learning. In: Horty J., Pacuit E. (eds) Proceedings LORI II Chongqing. Springer. Extended version in Gierasimczuk, N. (2010). Knowing one’s limits. Dissertation, ILLC, University of Amsterdam, Heidelberg, pp 90–104
Dégrémont, C., & Roy, O. (2009). Agreement theorems in dynamic epistemic logic. In A. Heifetz (Ed.), TARK ‘09: Proceedings of the 12th Conference on theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge, New York, pp. 91–98.
Demopoulos W. (2009) Three views of theoretical knowledge. Department of Philosophy, The University of Western Ontario, London
Doyle J. (1983) What should AI want from the supercomputers?. AI Magazine 4(4): 33–35
Earman J. (1992) Bayes or bust? A critical examination of Bayesian confirmation theory. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Fitelson, B. (2006). Old evidence, logical omniscience & bayesianism. Lecture ILLC workshop probability and logic.Department of Philosophy, University of California at Berkeley, Amsterdam.
Frege, G. (1879). Begriffsschrift, eine der arithmetischen nachgebildete Formelsprache des reinen Denkens. Halle a. S: Louis Nebert.
Friedman M. (2001) Dynamics of reason. CSLI Publications, Stanford
Gärdenfors P. (1988) Knowledge in flux. Bradford Books/MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Giles R. (1974) A non-classical logic for physics. Studia Logica 33: 399–417
Girard, P. (2007). Modal logic for belief and preference change. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Philosophy, Stanford University and ILLC, University of Amsterdam.
Glymour C. (1980) Theory and evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Glymour C. et al (1992) Android epistemology: Computation, artificial intelligence, and the philosophy of science. In: Salmon M.H. (eds) Introduction to the philosophy of science. Hackett, Indianapolis/Cambridge, pp 364–403
Goldman A. (1999) Knowledge in a social world. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Goodman N. (1955) Fact, fiction, and forecast. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Hempel C. (1965) Aspects of explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. The Free Press, New York
Hempel C., Oppenheim P. (1948) Studies in the logic of explanation. Philosophy of Science 15(2): 135–175
Hintikka J. (1973) Logic, language-games and information. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Hintikka J., Halonen I., Mutanen A. (2002) Interrogative logic as a general theory of reasoning. In: Gabbay D., Johnson R., Ohlbach H., Woods J. (eds) Handbook of the logic of argument and inference. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 295–338
Huff T. (1993) The rise of early modern science: Islam, China, and the West. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kelly K. (1996) The logic of reliable enquiry. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Ketland J. (2004) Empirical adequacy and Ramseyfication. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 287–300
Kuhn T. S. (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Kuipers Th. (2000) From instrumentalism to constructive realism. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht
Lorenz K., Lorenzen P. (1978) Dialogische logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt
Maibaum, T. (1986). Modular construction of logics for specification. In Proceedings 4th workshop on abstract data types. University of Braunschweig, Department of Computer Science, Informatik-Bericht Nr. 86–09.
McCarthy J. (1980) Circumscription—a form of non-monotonic reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13: 27–39
Mill J. S. (1843) A system of logic. Parker, London
Miller D. (1974) Popper’s qualitative theory of verisimilitude. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25: 166–177
Mittelstaedt P. (1978) Quantum logic. Reidel, Dordrecht
Nagel E. (1961) The structure of science. Hackett, Indianapolis
Osherson D., Stob M., Weinstein S. (1986) Systems that learn. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Pearce D., Rantala V. (1983) New foundations for metascience. Synthese 56: 1–26
Peirce, C. S. (1933). In C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.), Collected papers. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Przelecki M. (1969) The logic of empirical theories. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
Quine W. V. O. (1951) Two dogmas of empiricism. The Philosophical Review 60: 20–43
Ramsey, F. P. (1960). In Braithwaite, R. B. (Ed.), The foundations of mathematics and other logical essays. Paterson, NJ: Littlefield, Adams
Rescher N. (1970) Scientific explanation. The Free Press, New York
Robb A. A. (1914) A theory of time and space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Rott H. (2007) Information structures in belief revision. In: Adriaans P., van Benthem J. (eds) Handbook of the philosophy of information. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 457–482
Ryan, M. (1992). Ordered presentations of theories: Default reasoning and belief revision. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London.
Schurz G. (2009) When empirical success implies theoretical reference: A structural correspondence theorem. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60: 101–133
Skyrms B. (1990) The dynamics of rational deliberation. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Sneed J. D. (1971) The logical structure of mathematical physics. Reidel, Dordrecht
Staal F. (2006) Artificial languages across sciences and civilizations. Journal of Indian Philosophy 34(1–2): 89–141
Suppe, F. (eds) (1977) The structure of scientific theories. University of Illinois Press, Urbana
Tarski A. (1959) What is elementary geometry?. In: Henkin L., Suppes P., Tarski A. (eds) The axiomatic method, with special reference to geometry and physics. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 16–29
Toulmin S. (1958) The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
van Benthem J. (1978a) ‘Four Paradoxes’. Journal of Philosophical Logic 7: 49–72
van Benthem J. (1978b) Ramsey eliminability. Studia Logica 37(4): 321–336
van Benthem J. (1982) The logical study of science. Synthese 51: 431–472
van Benthem J. (1983) The logic of time. Reidel, Dordrecht
van Benthem J. (1984) Possible worlds semantics: A research program that cannot fail?. Studia Logica 43(4): 379–393
van Benthem, J. (1989). Semantic parallels in natural language and computation. In H.-D. Ebbinghaus et al. (Eds.), Logic colloquium. Granada 1987 (pp. 331–375). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
van Benthem, J. (1999). Logic in Games. Lecture Notes, ILLC Amsterdam & Department of Philosophy, Stanford. Book version to appear with Texts in Logic and Games FoLLI Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Heidelberg: Springer.
van Benthem, J. (2003). Is there still logic in Bolzano’s key?’ In E. Morscher (Ed.), Bernard Bolzanos Leistungen in Logik, Mathematik und Physik (Bd. 16, pp. 11–34). Sankt Augustin, Academia Verlag.
van Benthem, J. (2005). A note on modeling theories. In R. Festa, A. Aliseda, & J. Peijnenburg (Eds.), Confirmation, empirical progress and truth approximation. Essays in debate with Theo Kuipers (pp. 403–419). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
van Benthem J. (2006) Logic in philosophy. In: Jacquette D. (eds) Handbook of the philosophy of logic (pp. 65–99). Elsevier, Amsterdam
van Benthem J. (2007) Dynamic logic of belief revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 17(2): 129–155
van Benthem J. (2008) Logical pluralism meets logical dynamics?. The Australasian Journal of Logic 6: 28 pp
van Benthem J. (2009a) Horror contradictionis, ILLC Amsterdam, to appear. In: Hales S. (eds) Relativism. Oxford University Press, Oxford
van Benthem, J. (2009b). Logic, mathematics, and general agency. Amsterdam: ILLC. Appeared in Bour, P. E., Rebuschi, M., & Rollet, L. (Eds.), (2010). Construction (pp. 281–300). London: College Publications.
van Benthem, J. (2010). Logical dynamics of information and interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (to appear, summer 2011).
van Benthem J., Martinez M. (2008) The stories of logic and information. In: Adriaans P.,van Benthem J. (eds) Handbook of the philosophy of information. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 217–280
van Benthem, J., & Minica, S. (2009). Dynamic logic of questions. In J. Horty, & E. Pacuit(Eds.), Proceedings LORI II Chongqing (pp. 27–41). Heidelberg: Springer (Extended version as ILLC Report, University of Amsterdam).
van Benthem J., Pearce D. (1984) A mathematical characterization of interpretation between theories. Studia Logica 43(3): 295–303
van Benthem, J., & Velazquez-Quesada, F. (2009). Inference, promotion, and the dynamics of awareness. Amsterdam: ILLC. Appeared in Knowledge, rationality and action. Synthese, 177(1), 5–27 (2010).
Vickers, J. (2006). The problem of induction. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/.
von Helmholtz, H. (1868). Über die Thatsachen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen. In Nachrichten von der Königl. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen, No. 9 (3 June).
Wang W. (2008) Scientific explanation and the laws of nature. Institute of Science, Technology and Society, Tsinghua University, Beijing
Weinberger, O. (1965). Der Relativisierungsgrundsatz und der Reduktionsgrundsatz—zwei Prinzipien des Dialektischen Denkens’ Prague: Nakladatelství Ceskoslovenské Akademie Ved.
Wheeler G., Haenni R., Romeijn J.-W., Williamson J. (2010) Probabilistic logic and probabilistic networks. Springer, Heidelberg
Zwart S. (2002) Refined verisimilitude. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Acknowledgements
I thank Hannes Leitgeb, Jan-Willem Romeijn, and Sonja Smets for their lively, congenial and useful comments.
Open Access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
van Benthem, J. The logic of empirical theories revisited. Synthese 186, 775–792 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9916-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9916-6