David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
History and Philosophy of Logic 29 (3):227-261 (2008)
Two periods in the history of logic and philosophy are characterized notably by vivid interest in self-referential paradoxical sentences in general, and Liar sentences in particular: the later medieval period (roughly from the 12th to the 15th century) and the last 100 years. In this paper, I undertake a comparative taxonomy of these two traditions. I outline and discuss eight main approaches to Liar sentences in the medieval tradition, and compare them to the most influential modern approaches to such sentences. I also emphasize the aspects of each tradition that find no counterpart in the other one. It is expected that such a comparison may point in new directions for future research on the paradoxes; indeed, the present analysis allows me to draw a few conclusions about the general nature of Liar sentences, and to identify aspects that would require further investigation
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Saul A. Kripke (1975). Outline of a Theory of Truth. Journal of Philosophy 72 (19):690-716.
Jon Barwise (1987). The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity. Oxford University Press.
Robert L. Martin (ed.) (1984). Recent Essays on Truth and the Liar Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Graham Priest (1979). The Logic of Paradox. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1):219 - 241.
Michael Glanzberg (2004). A Contextual-Hierarchical Approach to Truth and the Liar Paradox. Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (1):27-88.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael Papazian (2012). Chrysippus Confronts the Liar: The Case for Stoic Cassationism. History and Philosophy of Logic 33 (3):197-214.
Miroslav Hanke (2013). Implied-Meaning Analysis of the Currian Conditional. History and Philosophy of Logic 34 (4):367 - 380.
Similar books and articles
Jordan Howard Sobel, On the Storeyed Revenge of Strengthened Liars, and the Contrary Finality of No-Proposition Resolutions.
Jason Zarri (2010). A Dilemma for Dialetheism. The Dualist 15 (Spring):21-31.
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2006). Formalizations Après la Lettre: Studies in Medieval Logic and Semantics. Dissertation, Leiden University
Stamatios Gerogiorgakis (2009). The Byzantine Liar. History and Philosophy of Logic 30 (4):313-330.
David Miller (2010). Reviews Unity, Truth and the Liar. The Modern Relevance of Medieval Solutions to the Liar Paradox . Edited by Shahid Rahman, Tero Tulenheimo, & Emmanuel Genot. Springer Verlag, 2008, Pp. XXIV+333, €160.45. [REVIEW] Philosophy 85 (3):433-436.
Catarina Dutilh Novaes (2009). Lessons on Sentential Meaning From Mediaeval Solutions to the Liar Paradox. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):682-704.
Keith Simmons (1987). On a Medieval Solution to the Liar Paradox. History and Philosophy of Logic 8 (2):121-140.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads12 ( #299,688 of 1,911,418 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #455,910 of 1,911,418 )
How can I increase my downloads?