The main argument depends on the duality between paraconsistency and paracompleteness. LFIs are suitable to both options, but we emphasize the epistemological interpretation of contradictions. two basic and philosophically legitimate approaches to paraconsistency that depend on whether the contradictions are understood ontologically or epistemologically. 3.2, we present and discuss philosophical issues related to paraconsistency in general, and especially to logics of formal inconsistency. The text is divided into two main parts (besides a short introduction). The aim of this text is to present the philosophical motivations for the Logics of Formal Inconsistency (LFIs), along with some relevant technical results. So why, he demands, is no postmodernist willing to say as much? A devastating example of the usefulness of relentless evaluation. Evans concludes by pointing out that this same argument could be advanced to suggest that the works of Holocaust deniers are just as valid as are those of historians who accept that the Nazis set out to commit genocide. All texts are equally valid, or invalid, they suggest - while insisting that the products of their own school are in fact more 'true' than those of their opponents. He is strongly critical both of the relevance and of the adequacy of their arguments, seeking to show that, ultimately, they are guilty of failing to accept the logic of their own position. Evans judges the acceptability of the reasoning advanced by the postmodernists - and finds it badly wanting. While In Defence of History addresses all aspects of historical method, its key focus is on an extensive evaluation of this postmodern thinking. In this reading, there could be no objective history, merely the study of the texts themselves. Historians were being forced to face up to postmodern thinking, which argued that, because all texts were the product of biased writers who had incomplete information, none could be privileged above others. Richard Evans wrote In Defence of History at a time when the historian's profession was coming under heavy attack as a result of the 'cultural turn' taken by the discipline during the late 1980s and the 1990s.
0 kommentar(er)
