PhilSci Archive

Do we need to know what two is for defining `two'? Theory and metatheory: should they align?

Krause, Décio (2026) Do we need to know what two is for defining `two'? Theory and metatheory: should they align? [Preprint]

[img] Text
2026___Levels_of_languages.pdf

Download (145kB)

Abstract

In a recent debate after a PhD defence, we were involved in the discussion about what the mediaeval philosophers (after Buridan) called the \textit{logica utens}, the logic of common reason. The question was whether, in order to create a non-classical logical system or mathematical theory, we still use our standard logic in the metatheory, which, if pushed sufficiently, will approach \textit{classical logic}. All the contenders agreed that some further discussion was in order. In this note, I sketch my opinion with the intention of fostering discussion; the example of `defining two' serves as a background for the discussion.


Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |

Item Type: Preprint
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
Krause, Déciodeciokrause@gmail.com0000-0003-0463-2796
Keywords: logica utens, logica docens, constructivism, non-classical logic, metalanguage
Subjects: Specific Sciences > Mathematics > Logic
Depositing User: Prof. Décio Krause
Date Deposited: 11 Jun 2026 15:21
Last Modified: 11 Jun 2026 15:21
Item ID: 30067
Official URL: https://sites.google.com/view/krausedecio
Subjects: Specific Sciences > Mathematics > Logic
Date: 11 June 2026
URI: https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/30067

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item