P. 1
Ted Draft] Logic for Philosophers

# Ted Draft] Logic for Philosophers

Ratings: (0)|Views: 360 |Likes:

### Availability:

See more
See less

11/08/2012

pdf

text

original

Logic for Philosophy
Theodore Sider
December 4, 2007

Preface
This book is an elementary introduction to the logic that students of contempo-rary philosophy ought to know. It covers i) basic approaches to logic, includingproof theory and especially model theory, ii) extensions of standard logic (such
as modal logic) that are important in philosophy, and iii) some elementary philosophy of logic. It prepares students to read the logically sophisticated
articles in today’s philosophy journals, and helps them resist bullying by symbol-
mongerers. In short, it teaches the logic necessary for being a contemporary
philosopher.
Forbetterorforworse(Ithinkbetter),thelastcentury-or-sosdevelopments
in logic are part of the shared knowledge base of philosophers, and inform,in varying degrees of directness, every area of philosophy. Logic is part of our shared language and inheritance. The standard philosophy curriculum
thereforeincludesahealthydoseoflogic. Thisisagoodthing. Buttheadvancedlogic that is part of this curriculum is usually a course in “mathematical logic”,
which usually means an intensive course in metalogic (for example, a coursebased on the excellent Boolos and Jeffrey (1989).) I do believe in the value of
one
advanced logic course, that course shouldnot, I think, be a course in metalogic. The standard metalogic course is toomathematically demanding for the average philosophy student, and omitsmaterial that the average student needs to know. If there is to be only one
advanced logic course, let it be a course designed to instill logical literacy.
I begin with a sketch of standard propositional and predicate logic (de- veloped more formally than in a typical intro course.) I briey discuss a fewextensions and variations on each (e.g., three-valued logic, denite descrip-tions). I then discuss modal logic and counterfactual conditionals in detail. Ipresuppose familiarity with the contents of a typical intro logic course: the
meanings of the logical symbols of rst-order predicate logic without identity
i

PREFACE ii
or function symbols; truth tables; translations from English into propositionalandpredicatelogic; someproofsystem(e.g., naturaldeduction)inpropositional
and predicate logic.
I drew heavily from the following sources, which would be good for supple-
mental reading:Propositional logic: Mendelson (1987)Descriptions, multi-valued logic: Gamut (1991
a
)Sequents: Lemmon (1965)
Further quantiers: Glanzberg (2006); Sher (1991, chapter 2); Wester-
ståhl (1989); Boolos and Jeffrey (1989, chapter 18)Modal logic: Gamut (1991
b
); Cresswell and Hughes (1996)Semantics for intuitionism : Priest (2001)Counterfactuals: Lewis (1973)Two-dimensional modal logic: Davies and Humberstone (1980)
Another source was Ed Gettier’s 1988 modal logic class at the University of
Massachusetts.
I am also deeply grateful for feedback from colleagues, and from studentsin courses on this material. In particular, Marcello Antosh, Josh Armstrong,
Gabe Greenberg, Angela Harper, Sami Laine, Gregory Lavers, Alex Morgan,
Jeff Russell, Brock Sides, Jason Turner, Crystal Tychonievich, Jennifer Wang,Brian Weatherson, and Evan Williams: thank you.