{"title":"模式与一元论","authors":"Leon Commandeur","doi":"10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this paper, I critically examine the monist interpretation of the logic-as-model view that Erik Stei puts forth in <i>Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence</i>. I will argue that, in addition to the three dimensions presented in the book, there is a fourth dimension on which pluralism in logic could arise, namely epistemological pluralism. An example of such a form of pluralism is model pluralism, being the idea that we need multiple models to fully account for the subject matter of logic. Such a form of pluralism is well-recognized and widely acknowledged in (model-based) science. I argue that if we endorse the logic-as-model view, then we should also recognize such a form of model pluralism in logic. While model pluralism is consistent with metaphysical monism — the idea that there is ultimately only one extra-systemic logical consequence relation — it does put pressure on the idea that there is one uniquely best model that fully captures that phenomenon.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93890,"journal":{"name":"Asian journal of philosophy","volume":"3 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Models and monism\",\"authors\":\"Leon Commandeur\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In this paper, I critically examine the monist interpretation of the logic-as-model view that Erik Stei puts forth in <i>Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence</i>. I will argue that, in addition to the three dimensions presented in the book, there is a fourth dimension on which pluralism in logic could arise, namely epistemological pluralism. An example of such a form of pluralism is model pluralism, being the idea that we need multiple models to fully account for the subject matter of logic. Such a form of pluralism is well-recognized and widely acknowledged in (model-based) science. I argue that if we endorse the logic-as-model view, then we should also recognize such a form of model pluralism in logic. While model pluralism is consistent with metaphysical monism — the idea that there is ultimately only one extra-systemic logical consequence relation — it does put pressure on the idea that there is one uniquely best model that fully captures that phenomenon.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"volume\":\"3 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian journal of philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian journal of philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44204-024-00216-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在本文中,我将对埃里克-施泰(Erik Stei)在《逻辑多元论与逻辑后果》(Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence)一书中提出的 "逻辑即模型 "观点的一元论解释进行批判性研究。我将论证,除了书中提出的三个维度之外,逻辑学中还可能出现第四个维度的多元论,即认识论多元论。这种多元论的一个例子是模型多元论,即我们需要多种模型来全面解释逻辑学的主题。这种形式的多元论在(基于模型的)科学中得到了广泛认可和承认。我认为,如果我们认可 "逻辑即模型 "的观点,那么我们也应该承认逻辑学中这种形式的模型多元论。虽然模型多元论与形而上学一元论--即最终只有一种系统外逻辑结果关系--是一致的,但它确实对存在一种唯一最佳模型来完全捕捉这一现象的观点造成了压力。
In this paper, I critically examine the monist interpretation of the logic-as-model view that Erik Stei puts forth in Logical Pluralism and Logical Consequence. I will argue that, in addition to the three dimensions presented in the book, there is a fourth dimension on which pluralism in logic could arise, namely epistemological pluralism. An example of such a form of pluralism is model pluralism, being the idea that we need multiple models to fully account for the subject matter of logic. Such a form of pluralism is well-recognized and widely acknowledged in (model-based) science. I argue that if we endorse the logic-as-model view, then we should also recognize such a form of model pluralism in logic. While model pluralism is consistent with metaphysical monism — the idea that there is ultimately only one extra-systemic logical consequence relation — it does put pressure on the idea that there is one uniquely best model that fully captures that phenomenon.