This chapter examimes relevance to misunderstandings about the meaning of aut and possible meanings of ‘or’. In spite of what has been said about the notion of form, there is no harm in applying the word ‘formal’ to the Stoics' work. By some standards, it is not informal, and by those standards, we may therefore call it formal where it is the contrast intended. Since the substitution account of validity would not rule out such disjunctions and a descriptive account would, the descriptive account seems on that score to be the more likely candidate for the Stoic conception of validity. Boole also took exclusivity, even the same arity-free idea of exclusivity, to be centrally important to his representation, but the exclusivity was constructed out of a non-exclusive disjunctive use of ‘or’.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.