Assertion: logic | /r/HasProperty | normative
Facets:
value: for thought
type: PURPOSE
value: for reasoning
type: PURPOSE
value: if indeed
type: DEGREE
Source sentences:
text: Presumably, if logic is normative for thinking or reasoning, its normative force will stem, at least in part, from the fact that truth bearers which act as the relata of our consequence relation and the bearers of other logical properties are identical to (or at least are very closely related in some other way) to the objects of thinking or reasoning: the contents of one’s mental states or acts such as the content of one’s beliefs or inferences, for example.
text: Next let us ask what it is that logic is normative for, if indeed it is normative.
text: Next let us ask what it is that logic is normative for, if indeed it is normative.
text: Even if there is a plausible sense in which logic can be said to be normative for thought or reasoning, there remains a worry about competition.
text: A different objection to logical pluralism starts from the premise that logic is normative, where this means that logics have consequences for how we ought to reason, i.e. for what we ought to believe, and for how we ought to update our beliefs when we learn new things.
text: Many writers have thought that logic is normative, sometimes because they have thought that logic just is the science of good reasoning:
text: The view rests on the thesis that logic is normative (see §1.4) along with a pluralism about epistemic normativity.