Göran Sundholm: “Inference versus Consequence” revisited revisited: Steps towards The current account of the Validity of Inference

Organized by the Department of Logic

Further information

Göran Sundholm (Leiden University):
“Inference versus Consequence” revisited revisited: Steps towards The current account of the Validity of Inference.

Abstract

The blindness of consequence (Prawitz 1974, 1985)
The difference between inference and consequence (Sundholm 1997)
Epistemic assumptions (Sundholm 1997)
The vacuous validity of inferences with contradictory premises (Prawitz 2009)
Validity as transmission of knowledge leads to circular definition of demonstration (Martin-Löf 2009)
“When I say Therefore I give others permission to assert the conclusion on my authority, given theirs for asserting the premises” (Sundholm 2009)
Breaking the circularity by a dialogical distinction between two kinds of knowledge (Martin-Löf 2014), namely
Assertoric versus apodictic knowledge (Klev 2022).