What’s So Bad About Second-Order Logic?

2Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Second-order logic is generally thought problematic by the philosophical populace. Philosophers of mathematics and logic may have sophisticated reasons for rejecting second-order logic, but ask the average philosopher-on-the-street what’s wrong with second-order logic and they will probably mumble something about Quine, ontological commitment, and set theory in sheep’s clothing. In this paper, I try to get more precise about exactly what might be behind these mumblings. I offer four potential arguments against second-order logic and consider several lines of response to each. Two arguments target the coherence of second-order quantification generally, and stem from concerns about ontological commitment. The other two target the expressive power of ‘full’ (as opposed to ‘Henkin’) second-order logic, and give content to the concern that second-order logic is in fact “set theory in sheep’s clothing”. My aim is to understand the dialectic, not take sides; still, second-order logic comes through looking more promising than we might have initially thought.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Turner, J. (2015). What’s So Bad About Second-Order Logic? In Synthese Library (Vol. 373, pp. 463–487). Springer Science and Business Media B.V. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18362-6_20

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free