S. Kaan Tabakci - Writings

S. Kaan Tabakci

Publications

Tabakci, S.K. (Forthcoming) Substructural Solutions to tonk, Logic in Asia: Studia Logica Library

Tabakci, S.K. (Forthcoming) Change of Logic, Persistence of Meaning, Recent Advances in the Philosophy of Logic, Routledge

Tabakci, S.K. (Forthcoming) Relevance of Subminimal Negation, Australasian Journal of Logic

Tabakci, S.K. (2024) Categoricity Problem for LP and K3, Studia Logica

Tabakci, S.K. (2022) Subminimal Negation on the Australian Plan, Journal of Philosophical Logic

[Published Absracts]

Speitel, S. and Tabakci, S. K. (Forthcoming)"Some Considerations on the Notion of Belnapian Uniqueness", The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic

Speitel, S. and Tabakci, S. K. (2025)"Semantic Universals for Moderate Inferentialists", The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic

Tabakci, S.K. (2023) "Categoricity for LP and K3", The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic

[In Turkish]

Tabakci, S.K. (Forthcoming) "Modalite Olarak Değilleme", 10. Çağdaş Siyaset Felsefesi Sempozyumu: Felsefe, Bilim, Dil ve Mantık’ta Olumsuzlamalar seçkisi

Under Review

Semantic Conditions for Moderate Inferentialists: Solutions to the Categoricity Problem (co-author with Sebastian Speitel)

Moderate inferentialists defend the thesis that inferences determine the truth-conditional meanings of the logical operators. An important technical and philosophical challenge to this position is the so-called categoricity problem. This is the problem that logics can be soundly interpreted by non-standard models which undermines the idea that inferences lead, unambiguously, to model-theoretic meanings.

Several strategies to solve this issue can be found in the literature. One approach consists in strengthening the proof-systems in such a way that the logics in question cannot be soundly interpreted by the non-standard models. Another restricts the class of admissible models of a logic by inferentialistically acceptable principles to rule out non-standard models. This paper discusses attempts in line with this latter solution strategy to the categoricity problem.

Our goal is to investigate restrictions on models that are both inferentialistically well-motivated and applicable to a wide variety of logical systems. This is not an easy task, since several inferentialistically unobjectionable restrictions do not generalize beyond particular logical systems, whereas other general and successful principles lack inferentialistically acceptable motivations. This paper proposes a taxonomy of several classes of principles and investigates their scope and chances of success in the context of the project of the moderate inferentialist about logical meanings.

In Preparation

Model-Theoretic Inferentialism: The Best of Both Worlds (co-author with Chanwoo Lee)

What makes logical and mathematical terms meaningful? What are the meanings of logical and mathematical terms? We explore model-theoretic inferentialism, which combines an inferentialist answer to the (former) metasemantic question and a denotation-based, model-theoretic answer to the (latter) semantic question. We characterize and defend model-theoretic inferentialism against rivaling accounts, especially orthodox denotationalism and orthodox inferentialism in logic and mathematics. Model-theoretic inferentialism has many variations, so we offer a way to classify different variations of model-theoretic inferentialism based on the normative basis of correct inferences and the ontological status of model-theoretic entities. Then, we introduce the Categoricity Problem: a major formal problem for model-theoretic inferentialism where the model-theoretic meanings of logical and mathematical terms are not uniquely determined by the inferences of the standard systems. We discuss the solutions in the literature to uncover how they match up with different approaches to model-theoretic inferentialism, since not every solution serves every form of model-theoretic inferentialism equally well. Based on these considerations, we develop three philosophical accounts of model-theoretic inferentialism, which will help us better comprehend the relevant results in philosophy of logic and mathematics.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse