Studia Logica 105 (5):881-914 (2017)

Authors
Ming Hsiung
Zhongshan University
Abstract
According to the revision theory of truth, the paradoxical sentences have certain revision periods in their valuations with respect to the stages of revision sequences. We find that the revision periods play a key role in characterizing the degrees of paradoxicality for Boolean paradoxes. We prove that a Boolean paradox is paradoxical in a digraph, iff this digraph contains a closed walk whose height is not any revision period of this paradox. And for any finitely many numbers greater than 1, if any of them is not divisible by any other, we can construct a Boolean paradox whose primary revision periods are just these numbers. Consequently, the degrees of Boolean paradoxes form an unbounded dense lattice. The area of Boolean paradoxes is proved to be rich in mathematical structures and properties.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11225-017-9715-2
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 51,723
External links

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

Paradox Without Self-Reference.Stephen Yablo - 1993 - Analysis 53 (4):251.
Truth and Paradox.Anil Gupta - 1982 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (1):1-60.
Patterns of Paradox.Roy T. Cook - 2004 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 69 (3):767-774.
Notes on Naive Semantics.Hans G. Herzberger - 1982 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (1):61 - 102.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Guest Editors’ Introduction.Riccardo Bruni & Shawn Standefer - 2019 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 48 (1):1-9.
What Paradoxes Depend On.Ming Hsiung - 2018 - Synthese:1-27.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Σ-Short Boolean Algebras.Makoto Takahashi & Yasuo Yoshinobu - 2003 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 49 (6):543-549.
Reference, Paradoxes and Truth.Michał Walicki - 2008 - Synthese 171 (1):195 - 226.
P ≠ NP for All Infinite Boolean Algebras.Mihai Prunescu - 2003 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 49 (2):210-213.
Presentence, Revision, Truth, and Paradox. [REVIEW]Nuel Belnap - 2006 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (3):705–712.
Definable Sets in Boolean Ordered o-Minimal Structures. II.Roman Wencel - 2003 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 68 (1):35-51.
Cofinally Invariant Sequences and Revision.Edoardo Rivello - 2015 - Studia Logica 103 (3):599-622.
Gupta's Rule of Revision Theory of Truth.Nuel D. Belnap - 1982 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 11 (1):103-116.
Vagueness and Revision Sequences.C. M. Asmus - 2013 - Synthese 190 (6):953-974.
A Boolean Model of Ultrafilters.Thierry Coquand - 1999 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 99 (1-3):231-239.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-03-13

Total views
25 ( #392,757 of 2,333,414 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #69,738 of 2,333,414 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes