Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic

This paper is a critical study of an argument put forward by Kwasi Wiredu in his engagement with C. I. Lewis on choosing the right modal logic for logical necessity. Wiredu argues that Lewis “could have been more adventurous modally with perfect logicality” and could justifiably have accepted S4 rat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David B. Martens
Format: Article
Language:ces
Published: Institute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of Sciences 2019-08-01
Series:Organon F
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26307
_version_ 1818275178780557312
author David B. Martens
author_facet David B. Martens
author_sort David B. Martens
collection DOAJ
description This paper is a critical study of an argument put forward by Kwasi Wiredu in his engagement with C. I. Lewis on choosing the right modal logic for logical necessity. Wiredu argues that Lewis “could have been more adventurous modally with perfect logicality” and could justifiably have accepted S4 rather than being “to the last cautious of any system stronger than S2” (Wiredu 1979). I address terse, incomplete, and provocatively incongruous notes on Wiredu’s paper by (Makinson 1980) and (Humberstone 2011), as well as a paper by (Cresswell 1965) that Humberstone cites, and I draw on recent work by (Lewitzka 2015; 2016). I conclude that Wiredu’s argument cannot be accepted as sound but a variant argument can be accepted as sound.
first_indexed 2024-12-12T22:25:38Z
format Article
id doaj.art-e92064b6830b43ca902103a405db7674
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1335-0668
2585-7150
language ces
last_indexed 2024-12-12T22:25:38Z
publishDate 2019-08-01
publisher Institute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of Sciences
record_format Article
series Organon F
spelling doaj.art-e92064b6830b43ca902103a405db76742022-12-22T00:09:46ZcesInstitute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of SciencesOrganon F1335-06682585-71502019-08-0126347449010.31577/orgf.2019.26307Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal LogicDavid B. Martens0University of the WitwatersrandThis paper is a critical study of an argument put forward by Kwasi Wiredu in his engagement with C. I. Lewis on choosing the right modal logic for logical necessity. Wiredu argues that Lewis “could have been more adventurous modally with perfect logicality” and could justifiably have accepted S4 rather than being “to the last cautious of any system stronger than S2” (Wiredu 1979). I address terse, incomplete, and provocatively incongruous notes on Wiredu’s paper by (Makinson 1980) and (Humberstone 2011), as well as a paper by (Cresswell 1965) that Humberstone cites, and I draw on recent work by (Lewitzka 2015; 2016). I conclude that Wiredu’s argument cannot be accepted as sound but a variant argument can be accepted as sound.https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26307C.I. LewisequivalenceidentityKwasi Wiredumodal logicS4
spellingShingle David B. Martens
Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
Organon F
C.I. Lewis
equivalence
identity
Kwasi Wiredu
modal logic
S4
title Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
title_full Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
title_fullStr Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
title_full_unstemmed Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
title_short Wiredu contra Lewis on the Right Modal Logic
title_sort wiredu contra lewis on the right modal logic
topic C.I. Lewis
equivalence
identity
Kwasi Wiredu
modal logic
S4
url https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2019.26307
work_keys_str_mv AT davidbmartens wireducontralewisontherightmodallogic