Fuzzy Systems and its Applications

Fuzzy Systems and its Applications

The foundations of revisionism in logic and fuzzy logic

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Mathematics, Mathematical Sciences,Tehram, Iran
10.22034/jfsa.2025.525659.1275
Abstract
The question of whether classical logic can be revised seems to have an easy answer: yes, it can! Aren't logic textbooks full of various devices for non-classical logics? Although intuitionistic logic, multi-valued and fuzzy logics and other non-classical logics are usually included in books on philosophical or computational logic, they are still labeled as logic, and who better to comment on logic than logicians themselves? Of course, some logicians and philosophers consider non-classical logics unnecessary. Among these, Quine's position, which apparently accepts the revision of logic, and Kripke's, which rejects the possibility of revision, are worth mentioning. In this article, we will address these issues and try to reconcile the two views mentioned. In addition, we will discuss fuzzy logic and its philosophy as one of the key and important non-classical logics.
Keywords

[1]    Bergmann, M. (2008). An Introduction to Many-Valued and Fuzzy Logic: Semantics, Algebras, and Derivation Systems, Cambridge University Press.
[2]    Birkhoff, G. & von Neumann, J. (1936). ”The Logic of Quantum Mechanics,” Annals of Mathematics, 37 (4), pp. 823-843.
[3]    Boddy, R. (2021). ”Frege on the Fruitfulness of Definitions,” Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy, 9 (11), pp. 100-114.
[4]    Burgess, J. (2013). ”Quine’s Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics,” in: G. Harman & E. Lepore (eds.), A Companion to W. V. O. Quine, Wiley, pp. 281-295.
[5]    Devitt, M. & Roberts, J. R. (2023). ”Changing Our Logic: A Quinean Perspective,” Mind, 133 (529), pp. 61-85.
[6]    Earman, J. & Norton, J. (1996). ”Infinite Pains: The Trouble with Supertasks,” in: A. Morton & S. Stitch (Eds.), Benacerraf and His Critics, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 231-261.
[7]    Hájek, P. (1998). Metamathematics of Fuzzy Logic, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[8]    Horvat, S. & Toader, I. D. (2025). ”An Alleged Tension Between non-Classical Logics and Applied Classical Mathematics,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 75 (2), pp. 579–597.
[9]    Itzhaki, Y. (2021). ”Qualitative versus Quantitative Representation: A Non-Standard Analysis of the Sorites Paradox,” Linguistics and Philosophy, 44 (5), pp. 1013-1044.
[10]    Kripke, S. A. (2023). ”The Question of Logic,” Mind, 133 (529), pp. 1-36.
[11]    MacFarlane, J. (2010). ”Fuzzy Epistemicism,” in: Dietz, R. & Moruzzi, S., Cuts and clouds: vague- ness, its nature, and its logic, New York: Oxford University Press.
[12]    Macfarlane, J. (2021). Philosophical Logic, Routledge.
[13]    Maddy, P. (2012). ”The Philosophy of Logic,” The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 18 (4), pp. 481-504.
[14]    Nelson, E. (1977). ”Internal Set Theory: A New Approach to Nonstandard Analysis,” Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 83 (6).
[15]    Quine, W. V. O. (1986). Philosophy of Logic: Second Edition, Harvard University Press.
[16]    Quine, W. V. O. (1951). ”Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” Philosophical Review, 60 (1), pp. 20-43.
[17]    Quine, W. V. O. (1954). ”Carnap and Logical Truth,” Synthese, 12.
[18]    Shapiro, S. (1991). Foundations without Foundationalism: A Case for Second-Order Logic, Oxford University Press.
[19]    Shramko, Y., & Wansing, H. (2025). ”Truth Values,” in: E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (eds.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring Edition).
[20]    Schurz, G. (2022). ”Meaning-Preserving Translations of Non-classical Logics into Classical Logic: Between Pluralism and Monism,” Journal of Philosophical Logic, 51, pp. 27–55.
[21]    Urquhart, A. (1986). ”Many-Valued Logic,” in: D. Gabbay & F. Guenther (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic (Vol. III), D. Reidel Publishing Co., pp. 71–116
[22]    Williamson, T. (1994). Vagueness, Routledge.
[23]    Williamson, T. (2013). ”Logic, Metalogic and Neutrality,” Erkenntnis, 79 (2), pp. 211-231.
[24]    Williamson, T. (2018). ”Alternative Logics and Applied Mathematics,” Philosophical Issues, 28 (1), pp. 399-424.
Volume 8, Issue 1 - Serial Number 16
Open Access Statement
June 2025
Pages 207-218

  • Receive Date 23 May 2025
  • Revise Date 05 June 2025
  • Accept Date 15 July 2025