David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The semantic paradoxes, whose paradigm is the Liar, played a crucial role at a crucial juncture in the development of modern logic. In his 1908 seminal paper, Russell outlined a system, soon to become that of the Principia Mathematicae, whose main goal was the solution of the logical paradoxes, both semantic and settheoretic. Russell did not distinguish between the two and his theory of types was designed to solve both kinds in the same uniform way. Set theoreticians, however, were content to treat only the set-theoretic paradoxes, putting aside the semantic ones as a non-mathematical concern. This separation was explicitly proposed, eighteen years after Russell’s paper, by Ramsey, though he, like Russell, advocated a system that addresses both kinds. Since then, the semantic paradoxes have been viewed within the perspective of the theory of truth, where they have occupied a respectable niche, but one of rather specialized interest.
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Michał Walicki (2009). Reference, Paradoxes and Truth. Synthese 171 (1):195 - 226.
Lionel Shapiro (2006). The Rationale Behind Revision-Rule Semantics. Philosophical Studies 129 (3):477 - 515.
Miroslav Hanke (2014). Semantic Paradox: A Comparative Analysis of Scholastic and Analytic Views. Res Philosophica 91 (3):367-386.
Similar books and articles
Otávio Bueno, Christopher Menzel & Edward N. Zalta (2013). Worlds and Propositions Set Free. Erkenntnis (4):1-24.
Thomas Forster & Thierry Libert (2010). An Order-Theoretic Account of Some Set-Theoretic Paradoxes. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (1):1-19.
Joachim Bromand (2002). Why Paraconsistent Logic Can Only Tell Half the Truth. Mind 111 (444):741-749.
Kevin C. Klement (2010). Russell, His Paradoxes, and Cantor's Theorem: Part II. Philosophy Compass 5 (1):29-41.
Bernhard Weiss (1994). On Russell's Arguments for Restricting Modes of Specification and Domains of Quantification. History and Philosophy of Logic 15 (2):173-188.
Emil Badici (2008). The Liar Paradox and the Inclosure Schema. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):583 – 596.
Kevin C. Klement (2009). A Cantorian Argument Against Frege's and Early Russell's Theories of Descriptions. In Nicholas Griffin & Dale Jacquette (eds.), Russell Vs. Meinong: The Legacy of. Routledge
Jon Barwise (1987). The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity. Oxford University Press.
Nino Cocchiarella (2000). Russell's Paradox of the Totality of Propositions. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (1):25-37.
Francisco A. Rodriguez Consuegra (1989). Russell's Theory of Types, 1901–1910: Its Complex Origins in the Unpublished Manuscripts. History and Philosophy of Logic 10 (2):131-164.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads38 ( #87,235 of 1,726,249 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #231,316 of 1,726,249 )
How can I increase my downloads?