Logical pluralism and linguistic relativism:
a hypothesis about the relationship between logic, language and thought
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.4013/fsu.2024.252.04%20Keywords:
linguistic relativism, logical pluralism, Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, logical expressivism, logic, language and reasoning.Abstract
This paper aims to connect two debates about the relation among language, reasoning and thought that belong to different theoretical and disciplinary fields, but that are closely linked. On the one hand, the philosophical debate about logical pluralism. And, on the other hand, the linguistic debate around the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. We propose a hypothesis compatible with a version of logical pluralism and linguistic relativism that makes it possible to explain the differences between thoughts expressed in different languages. This hypothesis, at the same time, supports the possibility of understanding and even translating different logical and linguistic variants. From a position akin to logical expressivism, we claim that there exists a proto-logic underlying all natural languages. The minimal logical operators proper of this proto-logic can be made explicit in a precise way in different formal systems. This gives rise to logical pluralism. We also offered an empirically informed philosophical argument in favor of this hypothesis.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jorge Alejandro Santos, Alba Massolo, Santiago Durante

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
I grant the Filosofia Unisinos – Unisinos Journal of Philosophy the first publication of my article, licensed under Creative Commons Attribution license 4.0 (which allows sharing of work, recognition of authorship and initial publication in this journal).
I confirm that my article is not being submitted to another publication and has not been published in its entirely on another journal. I take full responsibility for its originality and I will also claim responsibility for charges from claims by third parties concerning the authorship of the article.