Truth, Falsity, and Borderline Cases

Philosophical Topics 28 (1):211-244 (2000)
Abstract
According to the principle of bivalence, truth and falsity are jointly exhaustive and mutually exclusive options for a statement. It is either true or false, and not both, even in a borderline case. That highly controversial claim is central to the epistemic theory of vagueness, which holds that borderline cases are distinguished by a special kind of obstacle to knowing the truth-value of the statement. But this paper is not a defence of the epistemic theory. If bivalence holds, it presumably does so as a consequence of what truth and falsity separately are. One may therefore expect bivalence to be derivable from a combination of some principles characterizing truth and other principles characterizing falsity. Indeed, such derivations are easily found. Their form will of course depend on the initial characterizations of truth and falsity, and not all such characterizations will permit bivalence to be derived. In this paper we focus on the relation between its derivability and some principles about truth and falsity. We will use borderline cases for vague expressions as primary examples of an urgent..
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  General Interest  Philosophy of Mind
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0276-2080
DOI 10.5840/philtopics200028121
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,300
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
"True" as Ambiguous.Max Kölbel - 2008 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77 (2):359-384.
Bivalence and What is Said.Manuel García-Carpintero - 2007 - Dialectica 61 (1):167–190.
Can One Get Bivalence From (Tarskian) Truth and Falsity?de Sa Dan López - 2009 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (2):pp. 273-282.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Borderline Cases and Bivalence.Diana Raffman - 2005 - Philosophical Review 114 (1):1-31.
Falsity.Kevin Scharp - 2010 - In Cory D. Wright & Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen (eds.), New Waves in Truth. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Borderline Logic.David H. Sanford - 1975 - American Philosophical Quarterly 12 (1):29-39.
How to Respond to Borderline Cases.Dan López de Sa - 2010 - In Sebastiano Moruzzi & Richard Dietz (eds.), Cuts and Clouds. Oxford University Press.
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
120 ( #42,040 of 2,193,232 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #145,717 of 2,193,232 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature