Deduction and Novelty Again

The Reasoner 8 (5):51-52 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is commonly claimed that the conclusion of a valid deductive argument is contained in its premises and says nothing new. In 'Deduction and Novelty,' in The Reasoner 5 (4), pp. 56-57, I refuted that claim. In The Reasoner, 8 (3), pp. 24-25, David McBride criticised my refutation. I show that McBride’s arguments are unsound.

Links

PhilArchive

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

Deduction and Novelty.Danny Frederick - 2011 - The Reasoner 5 (4):56-57.
Can 'Big' Questions be Begged?David Botting - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (1):23-36.
The Content of Deduction.Mark Jago - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):317-334.
The Limits of Explication.Michael Scriven - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (1):47-57.
A Mathematical Model of Aristotle’s Syllogistic.John Corcoran - 1973 - Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 55 (2):191-219.
“The Strict Deduction System Is Impossible to Derive the Contradiction” And the Proof.Fang-Wen Yuan - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 13:147-162.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-04-30

Downloads
371 (#55,091)

6 months
2 (#1,206,195)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

The Contrast Between Dogmatic and Critical Arguments.Danny Frederick - 2015 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 22 (1):9-20.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references