Project description
A break with the Aristotelian tradition
Aristotle called the principle of non-contradiction the most certain of all principles. Since then, most Western logicians have viewed tolerance of contradictions as unacceptable and disastrous for science. The 20th century has seen the development of numerous systems of non-classical logic, including inconsistency-tolerant logics. The ERC-funded ConLog project will go beyond that development and will investigate logical systems that are not only inconsistency-tolerant but are inconsistent themselves and nevertheless nontrivial. ConLog will apply techniques from philosophical logic, such as Chellas-Segerberg models, as well as methods from structural proof theory and experimental philosophy. The goal of the project is to gain a deep understanding of certain non-trivial inconsistent logical systems.
Objective
“The acceptance of contradictions must lead ... to the end of criticism, and thus to the collapse of science.”
– Karl Popper, Conjectures and Refutations.
In the 20th century, many systems of non-classical logic have been developed, including inconsistency-tolerant logics, which are typically all subsystems of classical logic. There are, however, logical systems that are radically different from classical logic insofar as they are non-trivial but contradictory. These logics are in glaring conflict with logical orthodoxy since Aristotle, who called the Principle of Non-Contradiction the firmest of all principles. Non-trivial contradictory logics, sometimes called “dialetheic logics,” not only permit inconsistencies in theories, but contain provable contradictions.
Can that be reasonable? The Contradictory Logics project (ConLog) takes on the challenge of this rigorous break with the Aristotelian tradition by systematically investigating and developing non-ad hoc contradictory logics. In particular, ConLog studies non-trivial dialetheic systems of connexive logic that already validate certain contra-classical principles, such as the thesis saying that no proposition implies its own negation, and so-called “logics of logical bilattices.”
ConLog develops a clear comprehension of the contradictoriness of non-trivial dialetheic logics and studies the consequences of this understanding within the philosophy of logic. Thereby, the project will yield a paradigm-shift in our conception of what a respectable logical system and an acceptable scientific theory is. It will show that, contrary to the above quote from Popper, the inconsistency of a logical system does not prevent rational belief and does not lead to the end of criticism and a collapse of science. It will achieve this ambitious goal by applying techniques from philosophical logic, such as the use of Chellas-Segerberg models, as well as methods from structural proof theory and experimental philosophy.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
You need to log in or register to use this function
We are sorry... an unexpected error occurred during execution.
You need to be authenticated. Your session might have expired.
Thank you for your feedback. You will soon receive an email to confirm the submission. If you have selected to be notified about the reporting status, you will also be contacted when the reporting status will change.
Keywords
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Project’s keywords as indicated by the project coordinator. Not to be confused with the EuroSciVoc taxonomy (Fields of science)
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
-
H2020-EU.1.1. - EXCELLENT SCIENCE - European Research Council (ERC)
MAIN PROGRAMME
See all projects funded under this programme
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
ERC-ADG - Advanced Grant
See all projects funded under this funding scheme
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
(opens in new window) ERC-2020-ADG
See all projects funded under this callHost institution
Net EU financial contribution. The sum of money that the participant receives, deducted by the EU contribution to its linked third party. It considers the distribution of the EU financial contribution between direct beneficiaries of the project and other types of participants, like third-party participants.
44801 Bochum
Germany
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.