From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo Wed Feb 26 12:53:42 EST 1992
Article 3934 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo
>From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: MUST Philosopy be a Waste of Time?
Message-ID: <1992Feb22.233105.15817@psych.toronto.edu>
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <416@tdatirv.UUCP> <1992Feb16.194200.13547@psych.toronto.edu> <428@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1992 23:31:05 GMT

In article <428@tdatirv.UUCP> sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>
> I do
>not think this gives much scope for debate in logic, just room for choices
>of axiom systems.
>
Gee. I guess you'd better tell the _Journal of Symbolic Logic_ and the
related academic society. And all those people who write books on
"philosophical logic".  And then tell people like Russell and Lewis
Strawson and Grice and Quine and Kripke and Hinitikka that their
careers didn't exist, or weren't worth having had.
Perhaps you'd be interested in taking a look
at, just for instance, Copi & Gould's _Contemporary readings in logica
theory_ (1967, Macmillan). An EXTREMELY good recent interoduction to the
issues you claim do not exist can be found in Sainsbury's _Logical forms_
(Blackwell, 1991).


-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
---------------------


