Logical Analysis and History of Philosophy 15:159-84 (2012)
ABSTRACT: This paper discusses ancient versions of paradoxes today classified as paradoxes of presupposition and how their ancient solutions compare with contemporary ones. Sections 1-4 air ancient evidence for the Fallacy of Complex Question and suggested solutions, introduce the Horn Paradox, consider its authorship and contemporary solutions. Section 5 reconstructs the Stoic solution, suggesting the Stoics produced a Russellian-type solution based on a hidden scope ambiguity of negation. The difference to Russell's explanation of definite descriptions is that in the Horn Paradox the Stoics uncovered a hidden conjunction rather than a hidden existential sentence. Sections 6 and 7 investigate hidden ambiguities in 'to have' and 'to lose' (including inalienable and alienable possession) and ambiguities of quantification based on substitution of indefinite plural expressions for indefinite or anaphoric pronouns, and Stoic awareness of these. Section 8 considers metaphorical readings and allusions that add further spice to the paradox.
|Keywords||presupposition loaded questions fallacy of complex question horn paradox Stoic logic Russell scope ambiguity plural expressions inalienable possession anaphoric pronouns|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Stoics on Fallacies of Equivocation.Susanne Bobzien - 2006 - In D. Frede & B. Inwood (eds.), Language and Learning, Proceedings of the 9th Symposium Hellenisticum. Cambridge University Press.
The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory. [REVIEW]Douglas Walton - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (4):379-383.
The Principle of Uniform Solution (of the Paradoxes of Self-Reference).Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2000 - Mind 109 (433):117-122.
Quantified Modal Logic and the Plural De Re.Phillip Bricker - 1989 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 14 (1):372-394.
Logic: The Stoics (Part Two).Susanne Bobzien - 1999 - In Keimpe Algra, Jonathan Barnes & et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Anaphora in Intensional Contexts.Craige Roberts - 1997 - In Shalom Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell. pp. 215--246.
The Liar Paradox and the Inclosure Schema.Emil Badici - 2008 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (4):583 – 596.
Paradoxes of Intensionality.Dustin Tucker & Richmond H. Thomason - 2011 - Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):394-411.
The Inclosure Scheme and the Solution to the Paradoxes of Self-Reference.Jordi Valor Abad - 2008 - Synthese 160 (2):183 - 202.
Added to index2012-11-17
Total downloads815 ( #1,080 of 2,164,293 )
Recent downloads (6 months)91 ( #1,584 of 2,164,293 )
How can I increase my downloads?