Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPanahy, Salman
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-25T03:44:20Z
dc.date.available2019-01-25T03:44:20Z
dc.date.issued2017en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11343/220283
dc.description© 2018 Dr. Salman Panahy
dc.description.abstractThis thesis is about how deduction is analytic and, at the same time, informative. In the first two chapters I am after the question of the justification of deduction. This justification is circular in the sense that to explain how deduction works we use some basic deductive rules. However, this circularity is not trivial as not every rule can be justified circularly. Moreover, deductive rules may not need suasive justification because they are not ampliative. Deduction preserves meaning, that is, the meaning of non-logical vocabulary of any theory which is developed by deductive reasoning remains unchanged. It means that deduction adds no information to what we already had in our premises. This is why deduction is analytic. However, there are many ways deduction can be informative. In the next three chapters, I will pick a specific kind of deductive reasoning, namely arithmetical reasoning, and will attempt to understand the nature of information we obtain by this kind of reasoning. There is a difference between simple deductive moves such as inferring `Socrates is mortal' from `All human are mortal' and `Socrates is human', and inferring that a relation is reflexive given that it is directed, symmetric and transitive. The latter is more complicated and not as easy to prove as the former. Therefore it is informative and the proof we construct to prove it puts us in an epistemic position that we were not in before having the proof. To be more specific, I show that concepts we need to confirm the conclusion are made in the process of proving the conclusion.en_US
dc.rightsTerms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in Minerva Access is retained by the copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner. Readers may only download, print and save electronic copies of whole works for their own personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works.
dc.subjectphilosophy of logicen_US
dc.subjectepistemologyen_US
dc.subjectanalyticityen_US
dc.subjectjustification of deductionen_US
dc.titleA Justification for deduction and Its puzzling corollaryen_US
dc.typePhD thesisen_US
melbourne.affiliation.departmentSchool of Historical and Philosophical Studies
melbourne.affiliation.facultyArts
melbourne.thesis.supervisornameRestall, Greg
melbourne.contributor.authorPanahy, Salman
melbourne.accessrightsOpen Access


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record