Bilateral Rules as Complex Rules
From MaRDI portal
Publication:6200469
Cites work
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7034416 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1478228 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7599931 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3275554 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 3358455 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 7594147 (Why is no real title available?)
- Bilateralism does not provide a proof theoretic treatment of classical logic (for technical reasons)
- Bilateralism in proof-theoretic semantics
- Classical harmony and separability
- Classical harmony: Rules of inference and the meaning of the logical constants
- Classical logic without bivalence
- Completeness in Proof-Theoretic Semantics
- General-elimination stability
- HARMONISING HARMONY
- Harmony and autonomy in classical logic
- Inferentialism, Logicism, Harmony, and a Counterpoint
- Inversion principles and introduction rules
- Multiple conclusions
- On Inversion Principles
- Proof-theoretic semantics
- Proof-theoretic semantics, a problem with negation and prospects for modality
- Single-assumption systems in proof-theoretic semantics
- Some Remarks on Proof-Theoretic Semantics
- Some comments on Ian Rumfitt's bilateralism
- Speech acts, categoricity, and the meanings of logical connectives
- Validity concepts in proof-theoretic semantics
- Why conclusions should remain single
This page was built for publication: Bilateral Rules as Complex Rules
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q6200469)
