Impossible, yet not problematic: Making sense of adoption with dialogic type theory
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15381/tesis.v14i19.21937Keywords:
adoption problem, dialogic, constructive type theory, anti-exceptionalism, game-theoretic semanticsAbstract
Logical laws cannot be adopted —so goes Kripke and Padró’s Adoption Problem. Their argument can be seen as an invitation to revisit the way in which we relate Logic and inferential practice. For them, the former does not come before, but after the latter. In this paper I delve into this conclusion by showing how the impossibility of adoption can be naturally associated with some features of Immanent Reasoning, which is a mix between Dialogic and Constructive Type Theory that incorporates the pragmatics of inference at its core. The major insight to be drawn from this approximation is that adoption, although not possible, is no longer needed. Subsequently, the ‘problem’ loses its ‘problematic’ character. This conclusion illustrates some of the advantages of favoring the game-theoretic approach to semantics in philosophical logic.
References
Beall, J. C., Restall, G. (2006). Logical pluralism. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199288403.001.0001
Berger, A. (2011). Kripke on the incoherency of adopting a logic. In A. Berger (Ed.), Saul Kripke (pp. 177-207). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511780622.009
Blass, A. (1992). A game semantics for linear logic. Annals of Pure and Applied logic, 56(1-3), 183-220. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-0072(92)90073-9
Clerbout, N. (2014). Finiteness of plays and the dialogical problem of decidability. IfCoLog Journal of Logics and their Applications, 1(1):115-140.
Ferrari, F. and Orlandelli, E. (2021). Proof-theoretic pluralism. Synthese, 198, 4879-4903. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02217-6
Finn, S. (2019). The adoption problem and anti-exceptionalism about logic. The Australasian Journal of Logic, [S. I.], 16(7), 231-249. https://doi.org/10.26686/ajl.v16i7.5916
Kamareddine, F. D., Laan, T. and Nederpelt, R. (2004). A modern perspective on type theory: from its origins until today (Vol. 29). Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-2335-9
Keiff, L. (2007). Le pluralisme dialogique: Approches dynamiques de l’argumentation formelle. [PhD thesis, Université de Lille].
Padró, R. (2015). What the tortoise said to Kripke: The adoption problem and the epistemology of logic. CUNY Academic Works. [PhD thesis, City University of New York]. https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/603
Quine, W. (1986). Philosophy of logic. (2nd ed.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvk12scx
Rahman, S., McConaughey, Z., Klev, A. and Clerbout, N. (2018) Immanent reasoning or equality in action. A plaidoyer for the player level. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91149-6
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Miguel Álvarez Lisboa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
THE AUTHORS RETAIN THEIR RIGHTS:
(a) The authors retain their trademark and patent rights, and also on any process or procedure described in the article.
(b) The authors retain the right to share, copy, distribute, execute and publicly communicate the article published in Tesis (Lima) (in example, depositing the article in an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with recognition of its initial publication in the Tesis (Lima).
(c) The authors retain the right to make a later publication of their work, to use the article or any part of it (for example: a compilation of their works, notes for conferences, thesis, or for a book), provided that they indicate the source of publication (authors of the work, magazine, volume, number and date).
