A comparative taxonomy of medieval and modern approaches to Liar sentences
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Publication date | 2008 |
| Journal | History and Philosophy of Logic |
| Volume | Issue number | 29 | 3 |
| Pages (from-to) | 227-261 |
| Organisations |
|
| Abstract |
Two periods in the history of logic and philosophy are characterized notably by vivid interest in self-referential paradoxical sentences in general, and Liar sentences in particular: the later medieval period (roughly from the 12th to the 15th century) and the last 100 years. In this paper, I undertake a comparative taxonomy of these two traditions. I outline and discuss eight main approaches to Liar sentences in the medieval tradition, and compare them to the most influential modern approaches to such sentences. I also emphasize the aspects of each tradition that find no counterpart in the other one. It is expected that such a comparison may point in new directions for future research on the paradoxes; indeed, the present analysis allows me to draw a few conclusions about the general nature of Liar sentences, and to identify aspects that would require further investigation.
|
| Document type | Article |
| Published at | https://doi.org/10.1080/01445340701614464 |
| Downloads | |
| Permalink to this page | |