Philosophical Studies 144 (3):377 - 389 (2009)
|Abstract||Consideration of a paradox originally discovered by John Buridan provides a springboard for a general solution to paradoxes within the Liar family. The solution rests on a philosophical defence of truth-value-gaps and is consistent (non-dialetheist), avoids ‘revenge’ problems, imports no ad hoc assumptions, is not applicable to only a proper subset of the semantic paradoxes and implies no restriction of the expressive capacities of language.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joachim Bromand (2002). Why Paraconsistent Logic Can Only Tell Half the Truth. Mind 111 (444):741-749.
Kostis Vezerides & Dr Athanasios Kehagias, The Liar and Related Paradoxes:Fuzzy Truth Value Assignment for Collections of Self-Referential Sentences.
Jay Newhard (2005). Grelling's Paradox. Philosophical Studies 126 (1):1 - 27.
Keith Simmons (1993). Universality and the Liar: An Essay on Truth and the Diagonal Argument. Cambridge University Press.
Hartry Field (2007). Solving the Paradoxes, Escaping Revenge. In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Jeff Snapper (2012). The Liar Paradox in New Clothes. Analysis 72 (2):319-322.
Nicholas J. J. Smith (2000). The Principle of Uniform Solution (of the Paradoxes of Self-Reference). Mind 109 (433):117-122.
B. Armour-Garb (2012). No Consistent Way with Paradox. Analysis 72 (1):66-75.
Ernesto Perini-Santos (2011). John Buridans Theory of Truth and the Paradox of the Liar. Vivarium 49 (1-3):184-213.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #25,271 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?