| dc.description.abstract | In this thesis, we assess the following question: does Gila Sher’s logical structuralism about logic allow for logical pluralism? More specifically, can one consistently endorse both structuralism and the idea that multiple consequence relations are correct? In what follows, we first outline the main principles of Sher’s structuralist view. Subsequently, we define logical pluralism, building on Jc Beall and Greg Restall’s definition of logical pluralism. In the last chapter, we shall give a positive answer to the stated question: pluralism is attainable within structuralism. More precisely, it is argued that Sher’s structuralist view does not commit one to the belief that the world’s structure is uniform and that pluralism about consequence can therefore be defended via pluralism about structure or pluralism about interpretations of structure. | |
