Solving the Paradoxes, Escaping Revenge
نویسنده
چکیده
It is “the received wisdom” that any intuitively natural and consistent resolution of a class of semantic paradoxes immediately leads to other paradoxes just as bad as the first. This is often called the “revenge problem”. Some proponents of the received wisdom draw the conclusion that there is no hope of any natural treatment that puts all the paradoxes to rest: we must either live with the existence of paradoxes that we are unable to treat, or adopt artificial and ad hoc means to avoid them. Others (“dialetheists”) argue that we can put the paradoxes to rest, but only by licensing the acceptance of some contradictions (presumably in a paraconsistent logic that prevents the contradictions from spreading everywhere).1
منابع مشابه
Curry’s Revenge: the costs of non-classical solutions to the paradoxes of self-reference
The paradoxes of self-reference are genuinely paradoxical. The liar paradox, Russell’s paradox and their cousins pose enormous difficulties to anyone who seeks to give a comprehensive theory of semantics, or of sets, or of any other domain which allows a modicum of self-reference and a modest number of logical principles. One approach to the paradoxes of self-reference takes these paradoxes as ...
متن کاملA Revenge-Immune Solution to the Semantic Paradoxes
The paper offers a solution to the semantic paradoxes, one in which (1) we keep the unrestricted truth schema “True(〈A〉) ↔ A”, and (2) the object language can include its own metalanguage. Because of the first feature, classical logic must be restricted, but full classical reasoning applies in “ordinary” contexts, including standard set theory. The more general logic that replaces classical log...
متن کاملUltimate Truth vis-à-vis stable Truth
We show that the set of ultimately true sentences in Hartry Field’s Revenge-immune solution model to the semantic paradoxes is recursively isomorphic to the set of stably true sentences obtained in Hans Herzberger’s revision sequence starting from the null hypothesis. We further remark that this shows that a substantial subsystem of second order number theory is needed to establish the semantic...
متن کاملCan The Classical Logician Avoid The Revenge Paradoxes?∗
Most work on the semantic paradoxes within classical logic has centred around what I call ‘linguistic’ accounts of the paradoxes: they attribute to sentences or utterances of sentences some property that is supposed to explain their paradoxical or non-paradoxical status. ‘No proposition’ views are paradigm examples of linguistic theories, although practically all accounts of the paradoxes subsc...
متن کاملScharp on Replacing Truth
Kevin Scharp’s ‘Replacing Truth’ is an ambitious and far reaching account of the semantic paradoxes. In this critical discussion we examine one the books central claims: to have provided a theory of truth that avoids the revenge paradoxes. In the first part we assess this claim, and in the second part we investigate some features of Scharp’s preferred theory of truth, ADT, and compare it with e...
متن کامل