反逻辑例外论对例外论有威胁吗?

Is Anti-exceptionalism a Threat to Exceptionalism about Logic?

逻辑例外论与反例外论的争论是近年来逻辑哲学领域研究的热点。以约特兰、威廉姆森、普莱斯特等为代表的反逻辑例外论者的主要观点是:(1)逻辑理论、逻辑方法与科学理论、科学方法都是连续的;(2)逻辑理论是可以修正的,且基于与科学理论一样的理由/根据予以修正;(3)逻辑不是先天的,逻辑真也不是分析的。这三个观点既是这场争论的导火索,也是这场争论的焦点所在。因此,本文试图通过从基本概念的清晰界定、逻辑理论层次的区分上对反逻辑例外论的观点(1)(2)予以质疑,指出反逻辑例外论的不完善之处;并通过在逻辑史中对作为学科的逻辑的本质的考察,深入探究逻辑例外论认为逻辑具有先天性的归结所在,进而指出,反逻辑例外论的观点(3)在“逻辑先天性”问题上的质疑对逻辑例外论来说是有威胁力的,需予以重视。这样看来,对逻辑例外论与和反例外论的争论,最好持一种开放的心态,允许对逻辑以更多视角予以考察研究,推动逻辑的繁荣发展以及人类求真道路的坚实与多元。

The debate between exceptionalism about logic and anti-exceptionalism about logic is hot in philosophy of logic in recent years.The main points of anti-exceptionalists represented by Hjortland,Williamson and Priest are:(1)Logical theories and logical methods are continuous with scientific theories and scientific methods;(2)Logical theories are revisable and revised based on the same grounds as scientific theories;(3)Logic is not a priori,nor are its truths analytic truths.These three viewpoints are both the trigger and the focus of this debate.Therefore,this paper tries to challenge(1)(2)of anti-exceptionalism main points from the perspective of the clarification of basic concepts and the distinction of logical theories in hierarchy,and point out the imperfections of anti-exceptionalism;Moreover,through investigating the nature of logic in the history of logic,exploring the attribution of the a priori of logic,figure out that(3)threatens exceptionalists indeed on“a priori of logic”and should be paid more attention.Accordingly,it is best open to the debate between exceptionalism and anti-exceptionalism about logic,allowing logic to be studied from more views,so that it may promote the prosperity of logic and the robust and diversity of the way of truth persuing.