Philosophers are divided on whether the proof-theoretic or truththeoretic approach to logic is more fruitful. The proof-theoretic approach has its roots in Gentzen (1934–35) and Prawitz (1965). The truth-theoretic or semantic approach has its roots in Tarski (1936). More recently, the proof-theoretic approach has begun to encroach on semantics itself, with Dummett (1991), Brandom (2000), and others advocating proof-theoretic or inferentialist semantics, which they contrast with truth-theoretic, and in particular truth-conditional, semantics. Thematically, proof-theoretic semantics is associated with verificationism, the meaning-as-use approach to language, assertibilism, anti-realism, anti-representationalism, pragmatist approach to truth, and/or epistemic approach to logic. Truth-theoretic semantics is often associated with a truth-conditional theory of meaning, representational approach to mind and language, realism, correspondence truth, and/or metaphysics. Although the debate on the preferable approach to semantics goes beyond logic, it is often focused on logic—logical constants, logical inference, etc. My aim in this paper is to demonstrate the considerable explanatory power of a truth-based approach to logic. I will show that, and how, by employing a robust notion of truth (of a kind I will specify) we are able to provide:

中文翻译：

---

论逻辑中真理的解释力

对于逻辑的证明论方法还是真论方法更有效，哲学家们存在分歧。证明理论方法起源于 Gentzen (1934-35) 和 Prawitz (1965)。真理论或语义方法起源于 Tarski (1936)。最近，证明论方法开始侵占语义本身，Dummett (1991)、Brandom (2000) 和其他人提倡证明论或推理主义语义，他们与真论，尤其是真论形成对比。条件, 语义. 在主题上，证明论语义学与验证主义、语言的意义使用方法、可断言主义、反现实主义、反表征主义、实用主义的真理方法和/或逻辑的认知方法相关联。真论语义学通常与意义的真值条件理论、心灵和语言的表征方法、实在论、对应真理和/或形而上学相关联。尽管关于语义的优选方法的争论超出了逻辑，但它通常集中在逻辑上——逻辑常数、逻辑推理等。我在这篇论文中的目的是展示基于真值的逻辑方法的相当大的解释力。我将表明，以及如何通过采用稳健的真理概念（我将具体说明的一种），我们能够提供：我在这篇论文中的目的是证明基于真值的逻辑方法具有相当大的解释力。我将表明，以及如何通过采用稳健的真理概念（我将具体说明的一种），我们能够提供：我在这篇论文中的目的是证明基于真值的逻辑方法具有相当大的解释力。我将表明，以及如何通过采用稳健的真理概念（我将具体说明的一种），我们能够提供：