Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 79 (2):387 - 422 (2009)
|Abstract||It is argued that a certain form of the view that the semantic paradoxes show that natural languages are "inconsistent" provides the best response to the semantic paradoxes. After extended discussions of the views of Kirk Ludwig and Matti Eklund, it is argued that in its strongest formulation the view maintains that understanding a natural language is sharing cognition of an inconsistent semantic theory for that language with other speakers. A number of aspects of this approach are discussed and a few objections are entertained|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Hans Halvorson (2012). What Scientific Theories Could Not Be. Philosophy of Science 79 (2):183-206.
Matti Eklund (2002). Inconsistent Languages. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):251-75.
Matti Eklund (2002). Inconsistent Languages. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):251-275.
Andrew Bacon (2013). Curry's Paradox and Omega Inconsistency. Studia Logica 101 (1):1-9.
Kevin Scharp (2013). Truth, the Liar, and Relativism. Philosophical Review 122 (3):427-510.
Douglas Patterson (2007). Understanding the Liar. In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Thomas Hofweber (2010). Inferential Role and the Ideal of Deductive Logic. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5.
Douglas Patterson (2007). Inconsistency Theories: The Significance of Semantic Ascent. Inquiry 50 (6):575-589.
Berit Brogaard, Inconsistency Theories of Semantic Paradox, by Douglas Patterson. Philosopher's Digest.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads47 ( #27,388 of 739,336 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,336 )
How can I increase my downloads?