The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The logic of conditionals1
Abstract
The standard use of the propositional calculus ('P.C.’) in analyzing the validity of inferences involving conditionals leads to fallacies, and the problem is to determine where P.C. may be ‘safely’ used. An alternative analysis of criteria of reasonableness of inferences in terms of conditions of justification rather than truth of statements is proposed. It is argued, under certain restrictions, that P. C. may be safely used, except in inferences whose conclusions are conditionals whose antecedents are incompatible with the premises in the sense that if the antecedent became known, some of the previously asserted premises would have to be withdrawn.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Probabilities of Conditionals and Conditional Probabilities
Lewis, D. (1976) · IFS · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-9117-0_6 · Cited by 873
Being For: Evaluating the Semantic Program of Expressivism
Schroeder, M. (2008) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199534654.001.0001 · Cited by 299
Ginsberg, M. L. (1986) · Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/0004-3702(86)90067-6 · Cited by 218
A Ranking‐Theoretic Approach to Conditionals
Spohn, W. (2013) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12057 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Adams, E.
- Venue
- Inquiry
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1965-01
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1-4
- Pages
- 166-197
- ISSN
- 0020-174X (ISSN-L)
- 1502-3923
- OpenAlex
- W4249439747
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The logic of conditionals1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00201746508601430
- The paper
- Adams, E. (1965). The logic of conditionals1. Inquiry. https://doi.org/10.1080/00201746508601430
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
