David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophical Logic 35 (4):393 - 422 (2006)
A number of philosophers have argued that the key to understanding the semantic paradoxes is to recognize that truth is essentially relative to context. All of these philosophers have been motivated by the idea that once a liar sentence has been uttered we can 'step back' and, from the point of view of a different context, judge that the liar sentence is true. This paper argues that this 'stepping back' idea is a mistake that results from failing to relativize truth to context in the first place. Moreover, context-relative liar sentences, such as 'This sentence is not true in any context' present a paradox even after truth has been relativized to context. Nonetheless, the relativization of truth to context may offer us the means to avoid paradox, if we can justifiably deny that a sentence about a context can be true in the very context it is about
|Keywords||liar paradox truth context|
|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.
Scott Soames (1998). Understanding Truth. Oxford University Press.
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.
Robert Stalnaker (1973). Presuppositions. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2 (4):447 - 457.
Citations of this work BETA
Ian Rumfitt (2014). I—Truth and Meaning. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 88 (1):21-55.
Jc Beall & Michael Glanzberg (2008). Where the Paths Meet: Remarks on Truth and Paradox. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 32 (1):169-198.
Jordan Howard Sobel (2008). 'Hoist with His Owne Petar':1 on the Undoing of a Liar Paradox. Theoria 74 (2):115-145.
Ian Rumfitt (2014). I—Ian Rumfitt: Truth and Meaning. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 88 (1):21-55.
Similar books and articles
Dale Jacquette (2007). Denying The Liar. Polish Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):91-98.
Bradley H. Dowden (1984). Accepting Inconsistencies From the Paradoxes. Journal of Philosophical Logic 13 (2):125-30.
Timothy Williamson (2005). Knowledge, Context, and the Agent's Point of View. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy: Knowledge, Meaning, and Truth. Oxford University Press 91--114.
Michael Glanzberg (2004). A Contextual-Hierarchical Approach to Truth and the Liar Paradox. Journal of Philosophical Logic 33 (1):27-88.
J. C. Beall (ed.) (2007). Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Elia Zardini (2008). Truth and What is Said. Philosophical Perspectives 22 (1):545-574.
Christopher Gauker (2005). Semantics for Deflationists. In J. C. Beall & Bradley Armour-Garb (eds.), Deflationism and Paradox. Oxford University Press
Jordan Howard Sobel, On the Storeyed Revenge of Strengthened Liars, and the Contrary Finality of No-Proposition Resolutions.
Alexandre Billon (2011). My Own Truth ---Pathologies of Self-Reference and Relative Truth. In Rahman Shahid, Primiero Giuseppe & Marion Mathieu (eds.), Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science, Vol. 23. Springer
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads69 ( #63,594 of 1,911,412 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #177,396 of 1,911,412 )
How can I increase my downloads?