Title: A New Problem for Logical Contextualism

Abstract: Logical contextualism is the view that ‘valid’ is a context-sensitive expression. One key reason to endorse logical contextualism is that, unlike traditional forms of logical pluralism, it can avoid the so-called collapse problem. Logical contextualism relies on the crucial assumption that each conversational context determines a uniquely appropriate logical consequence relation. In this talk, I argue for two points. First, I put pressure on this crucial assumption by focusing on the design of several card-selection tasks. Second, I show that, once this assumption is rejected, logical contextualism does not solve the collapse problem. In light of these two points, my conclusion will be that logical contextualism, as currently developed, is a less promising view than thus far appreciated.