David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In the early 20th century, scepticism was common among philosophers about the very meaningfulness of the notion of truth – and of the related notions of denotation, definition etc. (i.e., what Tarski called semantical concepts). Awareness was growing of the various logical paradoxes and anomalies arising from these concepts. In addition, more philosophical reasons were being given for this aversion.1 The atmosphere changed dramatically with Alfred Tarski’s path-breaking contribution. What Tarski did was to show that, assuming that the syntax of the object language is specified exactly enough, and that the metatheory has a certain amount of set theoretic power,2 one can explicitly define truth in the object language. And what can be explicitly defined can be eliminated. It follows that the defined concept cannot give rise to any inconsistencies (that is, paradoxes). This gave new respectability to the concept of truth and related notions. Nevertheless, philosophers’ judgements on the nature and philosophical relevance of Tarski’s work have varied. It is my aim here to review and evaluate some threads in this debate.
|Keywords||Tarski Truth The correspondence theory of truth Model theory|
|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
Jeroen Smid (2014). Tarski’s One and Only Concept of Truth. Synthese 191 (14):3393-3406.
Similar books and articles
Panu Raatikainen (2008). Truth, Meaning, and Translation. In Douglas Patterson (ed.), New essays on Tarski and philosophy. O.U.P. 247.
Richard C. Jennings (1987). Tarski - a Dilemma. Inquiry 30 (1 & 2):155 – 172.
Luis Fernández Moreno (2001). Tarskian Truth and the Correspondence Theory. Synthese 126 (1-2):123 - 147.
Susan Haack (1976). Is It True What They Say About Tarski? Philosophy 51 (197):323 - 336.
Dale Jacquette (2010). Circularity or Lacunae in Tarski's Truth-Schemata. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19 (3):315-326.
Ilkka Niiniluoto (2004). Tarski's Definition and Truth-Makers. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 126 (1-3):57-76.
Greg Frost-Arnold (2004). Was Tarski's Theory of Truth Motivated by Physicalism? History and Philosophy of Logic 25 (4):265-280.
David DeVidi & Graham Solomon (1999). Tarski on “Essentially Richer” Metalanguages. Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (1):1-28.
Peter Milne (1999). Tarski, Truth and Model Theory. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 99 (2):141–167.
Panu Raatikainen (2003). More on Putnam and Tarski. Synthese 135 (1):37 - 47.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads66 ( #54,853 of 1,777,939 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #86,917 of 1,777,939 )
How can I increase my downloads?