A simple solution to the collapse argument for logical pluralism

DIEGO TAJER

Conferencia; IX Workshop on Philosophical Logic; 2020

A number of philosophers (Read 2006, Priest 2006, Stei 2020, Steinberger 2019a) have argued that logical pluralism is not compatible with the normativity of logic. They provided different versions the Collapse argument: if many logics are correct and all of them are normative, then the weakest ones will be irrelevant. In this paper, I claim that the Collapse argument is based on a controversial premise. I explain how to solve this problem, maintaining both logical pluralism and the normativity of logic. I provide an example of this solution and a general recipe.