Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
  • Register
  • Login
  • Language
    • English
    • Język Polski
  • Menu
  • Home
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Online First Articles
  • About
    • About the Journal
    • Submissions
    • Editorial Team
    • Advisory Board
    • Peer Review Process
    • Logic and Logical Philosophy Committee
    • Open Access Policy
    • Privacy Statement
    • Contact
  • Register
  • Login
  • Language:
  • English
  • Język Polski

Logic and Logical Philosophy

Logica Dominans vs. Logica Serviens
  • Home
  • /
  • Logica Dominans vs. Logica Serviens
  1. Home /
  2. Archives /
  3. Vol. 31 No. 2 (2022): June /
  4. Articles

Logica Dominans vs. Logica Serviens

Authors

  • Jaroslav Peregrin Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciencews https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0460-1933
  • Vladimír Svoboda Department of Logic, Institute of Philosophy, Czech Academy of Sciences https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9110-0087

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2022.004

Keywords

logic, logica dominans, logica serviens, the nature of logical laws, logical knowledge

Abstract

Logic is usually presented as a tool of rational inquiry; however, many logicians in fact treat logic so that it does not serve us, but rather governs us – as rational beings we are subordinated to the logical laws we aspire to disclose. We denote the view that logic primarily serves us as logica serviens, while denoting the thesis that it primarily governs our reasoning as logica dominans. We argue that treating logic as logica dominans is misguided, for it leads to the idea of a “genuine” logic within a “genuine” language. Instead of this, we offer a naturalistic picture, according to which the only languages that exist are the natural languages and the artificial languages logicians have built. There is, we argue, no language beyond these, especially none that would be a wholesome vehicle of reasoning like the natural languages and yet be transparently rigorous like the artificial ones. Logic is a matter of using the artificial languages as idealized models of the natural ones, whereby we pinpoint the laws of logic by means of zooming in on a reflective equilibrium.

References

Aristotle, 1984 ,: Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, Volume 1, J. Barnes (ed.), Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Boole, G., 1854, An Investigation of the Laws of Thought, on which are Founded the Mathematical Theories of Logic and Probabilities, London: Walton & Maberley.

Brun, G., 2020, “Conceptual re-engineering: From explication to reflective equilibrium”, Synthese 197: 925–954. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1596-4

Caret, C. R., and O. T. Hjortland (eds.), 2015, Foundations of Logical Consequence, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198715696.001.0001

Cummins, R. C., 1998, “Reflection on reflective equilibrium”, pages 113–128 in M. DePaul and W. Ramsey (eds.), Rethinking Intuition, London: Rowman & Littlefield.

Dewey, J., 1929, The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action, London: Allen & Unwin.

Elgin, C. Z., 1996, Considered Judgment, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Field, H., 2015, “What is logical validity?”, pages 33–70 in [Caret & Hjortland, 2015]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198715696.003.0002

Frege, G., 1879, Begriffsschrift, Halle: Nebert. Quoted from the English translation “Begriffsschrift”; pages 1–82 in van Heijenoort (ed.): From Frege to Gödel: A Source Book from Mathematical Logic, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press, 1967.

Frege, G., 1893, Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, Vol. 1, Jena: Pohle. English translation Basic Laws of Arithmetic: Derived using concept-script, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Glanzberg, M., 2015, “Logical consequence and natural language”, pages 71–120 in [Caret & Hjortland, 2015]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198715696.003.0003

Goodman, N., 1955, Fact, Fiction, and Forecast, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.

Hanna, R., 2006, Rationality and Logic, Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Harman, G., 1986, Change in View (Principles of Reasoning), Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Hjortland, O. T., 2019, “What counts as evidence for a logical theory?”, The Australasian Journal of Logic 16: 250–282. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26686/ajl.v16i7.5912

Janssen, T. M., 1986, Foundations and Applications of Montague Grammar, Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum.

Klima, G., 2008, John Buridan, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 8–26.

Maddy, P., 2014, “A second philosophy of logic”, pages 93–108 in P. Rush (ed.), The Metaphysics of Logic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626279.007

Peirce, Ch. S., 1882, “Introductory lecture on the study of logic”, pages 378–384 in Writings of Charles S. Peirce, vol. 4, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1989.

Peregrin, J., 2020, Philosophy of Logical Systems, New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367808631

Peregrin, J., and V. Svoboda, 2013, “Criteria for logical formalization”, Synthese 190: 2897–2924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0104-0

Peregrin, J., and V. Svoboda, 2017, Reflective Equilibrium and the Principles of Logical Analysis: Understanding the Laws of Logic, New York: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315453934

Peregrin, J., and V. Svoboda, 2021,“Moderate anti-exceptionalism and earthborn logic”, Synthese 199 (3–4): 8781–8806. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03182-9

Priest, G., 2014, “Revising logic”, pages 211—223 in P. Rush (ed.), The Metaphysics of Logic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626279.016

Russell, B., 1919, Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy, London: Allen & Unwin.

Shapiro, S., 2001, “Modeling and normativity. How much revisionism can we tolerate?”, Agora 20: 159-–173.

Sher, G., 2016, Epistemic Friction: An Essay on Knowledge, Truth, and Logic, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198768685.001.0001

Sher, G., 2020, “Pluralism and normativity in truth and logic”, American Philosophical Quarterly 57: 337–354. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/48584451

Sider, T., 2011, Writing the Book of the World, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697908.001.0001

Steinberger, F., (2019), “Three ways in which logic might be normative”, The Journal of Philosophy 116: 5–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil201911611

Tahko, T. E., 2021, “A survey of logical realism”, Synthese 198: 4775-–4790. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02369-5

Warren, J., 2018, “Change of logic, change of meaning”, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 96: 421–442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12312

Warren, J., 2020, Shadows of Syntax: Revitalizing Logical and Mathematical Conventionalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190086152.001.0001

Wittgenstein, L., 1956, Bemerkungen über die Grundlagen der Mathematik, Oxford: Blackwell. English translation Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics, Oxford: Blackwell, 1956.

Logic and Logical Philosophy

Downloads

  • PDF

Published

2022-02-04

How to Cite

1.
PEREGRIN, Jaroslav and SVOBODA, Vladimír. Logica Dominans vs. Logica Serviens. Logic and Logical Philosophy. Online. 4 February 2022. Vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 183-207. [Accessed 27 December 2025]. DOI 10.12775/LLP.2022.004.
  • ISO 690
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver
Download Citation
  • Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
  • BibTeX

Issue

Vol. 31 No. 2 (2022): June

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Jaroslav Peregrin, Vladimír Svoboda

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Stats

Number of views and downloads: 1535
Number of citations: 0

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Search

Search

Browse

  • Browse Author Index
  • Issue archive

User

User

Current Issue

  • Atom logo
  • RSS2 logo
  • RSS1 logo

Information

  • For Readers
  • For Authors
  • For Librarians

Newsletter

Subscribe Unsubscribe

Language

  • English
  • Język Polski

Tags

Search using one of provided tags:

logic, logica dominans, logica serviens, the nature of logical laws, logical knowledge
Up

Akademicka Platforma Czasopism

Najlepsze czasopisma naukowe i akademickie w jednym miejscu

apcz.umk.pl

Partners

  • Akademia Ignatianum w Krakowie
  • Akademickie Towarzystwo Andragogiczne
  • Fundacja Copernicus na rzecz Rozwoju Badań Naukowych
  • Instytut Historii im. Tadeusza Manteuffla Polskiej Akademii Nauk
  • Instytut Kultur Śródziemnomorskich i Orientalnych PAN
  • Instytut Tomistyczny
  • Karmelitański Instytut Duchowości w Krakowie
  • Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego
  • Państwowa Akademia Nauk Stosowanych w Krośnie
  • Państwowa Akademia Nauk Stosowanych we Włocławku
  • Państwowa Wyższa Szkoła Zawodowa im. Stanisława Pigonia w Krośnie
  • Polska Fundacja Przemysłu Kosmicznego
  • Polskie Towarzystwo Ekonomiczne
  • Polskie Towarzystwo Ludoznawcze
  • Towarzystwo Miłośników Torunia
  • Towarzystwo Naukowe w Toruniu
  • Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
  • Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie
  • Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika
  • Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
  • Uniwersytet Warszawski
  • Wojewódzka Biblioteka Publiczna - Książnica Kopernikańska
  • Wyższe Seminarium Duchowne w Pelplinie / Wydawnictwo Diecezjalne „Bernardinum" w Pelplinie

© 2021- Nicolaus Copernicus University Accessibility statement Shop