University Library
  • Login
A gateway to Melbourne's research publications
Minerva Access is the University's Institutional Repository. It aims to collect, preserve, and showcase the intellectual output of staff and students of the University of Melbourne for a global audience.
View Item 
  • Minerva Access
  • Arts
  • School of Historical and Philosophical Studies
  • School of Historical and Philosophical Studies - Theses
  • View Item
  • Minerva Access
  • Arts
  • School of Historical and Philosophical Studies
  • School of Historical and Philosophical Studies - Theses
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    The logic of relative systems

    Thumbnail
    Citations
    Altmetric
    Author
    Ressler, M. R.
    Date
    2009
    Affiliation
    Arts - School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Document Type
    PhD thesis
    Citations
    Ressler, M. R. (2009). The logic of relative systems. PhD thesis, School of Philosophy, Anthropology and Social Inquiry, The University of Melbourne.
    Access Status
    This item is currently not available from this repository
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/11343/35143
    Linked Resource URL
    http://cat.lib.unimelb.edu.au/record=b3487269
    Description

    © 2009 Dr. Mark Raymond Ressler

    Abstract
    This study aims to develop the logic of relativism, then to apply that logic to the question of self-refutation in relativism. After first defining generic relativism as radical indexed pluralism, the study identifies three substantive theses following as a consequence of this definition that any instance of relativism must meet: (1) the formal requirements for relativity, (2) objective equity, and (3) incommensurability. Each of the three theses is developed in detail to determine precisely what must be demonstrated by a claim of relativism. Next, the study develops five separate logical systems to represent the logic of relativism, each adding progressively more complex relativistic features. The first system is modelled on basic modal logic. The second models multiple kinds of relativity. The third models relativised accessibility relations. The fourth combines features of the second and third systems. And the fifth is modelled on a non-normal modal logic. Finally, the charge of self-refutation is evaluated with regard to each system in turn. I argue that while all five systems initially seem to support models that support fully relativistic perspectives, when an operator is added to the language to express whether a sentence is true for a perspective, four of the systems can no longer support fully relativistic perspectives, since some sentences including that operator must be evaluated to be absolute within all perspectives. The fifth system, however, formulated analogously to a non-normal modal logic, does support fully relativistic perspectives even with the additional operator. I argue further that the nature of relativism provides some motivation for considering this last system to be the logic of global relativism. While these formal, structural arguments do not fully address all the varieties of self-refutation arguments levelled against relativism, in particular, those based upon pragmatics, incoherence, and the nature of language, I argue that there are reasons to think that these latter kinds of argument may not be completely successful, and I suggest various ways that these arguments might be strengthened against relativism.
    Keywords
    philosophy; relativism; logic; incommensurability

    Export Reference in RIS Format     

    Endnote

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format" and choose "open with... Endnote".

    Refworks

    • Click on "Export Reference in RIS Format". Login to Refworks, go to References => Import References


    Collections
    • Minerva Elements Records [53102]
    • School of Historical and Philosophical Studies - Theses [1610]
    Minerva AccessDepositing Your Work (for University of Melbourne Staff and Students)NewsFAQs

    BrowseCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects
    My AccountLoginRegister
    StatisticsMost Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors