Philosopher's Digest (2009)
Douglas Patterson argues that the best way to respond to the semantic paradoxes that arise in natural language is to take natural language semantics to be (explosively) inconsistent. According to Patterson, to understand a natural language is to share with others cognition of a false semantic theory. Patterson’s main argument runs as follows. English is expressively rich. So, the first sentence occurring in this review could be.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Tarski, the Liar, and Inconsistent Languages.Douglas Eden Patterson - 2006 - The Monist 89 (1):150-177.
Inconsistency Theories: The Significance of Semantic Ascent.Douglas Patterson - 2007 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 50 (6):575-589.
Inferential Role and the Ideal of Deductive Logic.Thomas Hofweber - 2010 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5 (1).
Understanding the Liar.Douglas Patterson - 2007 - In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press. pp. 197.
Added to index2009-06-02
Total downloads302 ( #10,295 of 2,178,176 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #316,504 of 2,178,176 )
How can I increase my downloads?