Comments on Foster’s “on Tarski’s Theory of Logical Consequence-a Reply to Bates”

Southwest Philosophy Review 16 (2):191-194 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the present commentary, I argue that Foster has attacked an uncharitable reconstruction of Etchemendy's argument against Tarski's account of the logical properties. I provide an alternative, more charitable reconstruction of that argument that withstands Foster's objections.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,449

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Etchemendy, Tarski, and Logical Consequence.Jared Bates - 1999 - Southwest Philosophy Review 15 (1):47-54.
On a fallacy attributed to Tarski.Mario Gómez-Torrente - 1998 - History and Philosophy of Logic 19 (4):227-234.
Logical consequence: A defense of Tarski.Greg Ray - 1996 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 25 (6):617 - 677.
Tarski and the Concept of Logical Consequence.Craig Nicholas Bach - 1995 - Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley
On the possibility of a privileged class of logical terms.Greg Ray - 1996 - Philosophical Studies 81 (2-3):303 - 313.
Etchemendy and Bolzano on Logical Consequence.Paul Rusnock & Mark Burke - 2010 - History and Philosophy of Logic 31 (1):3-29.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-07-26

Downloads
102 (#213,682)

6 months
6 (#572,300)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jared Bates
Hanover College

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references