Fragility and strength

IF 1.1 1区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

ANALYSIS Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1093/analys/anad106

Teodor-Tiberiu Călinoiu, Daniele Bruno Garancini

引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is customarily assumed that paracomplete and paraconsistent solutions to liar paradoxes require a logical system weaker than classical logic. That is, if a logic is not fragile to liar paradoxes, it must be logically weaker than classical logic. Defenders of classical logic argue that the losses of weakening it outweigh the gains. Advocates of paracomplete and paraconsistent solutions disagree. We articulate the notion of fragility with respect to the liar paradox and show that it can be disentangled from logical strength. Strength and resilience to paradox do not force a trade-off with respect to liars: there can be logics which are not weaker than classical logic and are solid to the liar.

查看原文本刊更多论文

脆弱性和强度

人们通常认为，要解决说谎者悖论的准完备性和准一致性问题，需要一个比经典逻辑更弱的逻辑系统。也就是说，如果一种逻辑对说谎者悖论并不脆弱，那么它在逻辑上一定比经典逻辑弱。古典逻辑的捍卫者认为，削弱古典逻辑得不偿失。准完全和准一致解决方案的倡导者则不同意这种观点。我们就骗子悖论阐明了脆弱性的概念，并证明它可以与逻辑强度区分开来。对于说谎者而言，悖论的强度和复原力并不意味着必须权衡利弊：可以有一些逻辑并不比经典逻辑弱，而且对于说谎者而言是可靠的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

ANALYSIS PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： Analysis is the most established and esteemed forum in which to publish short discussions of topics in philosophy. Articles published in Analysis lend themselves to the presentation of cogent but brief arguments for substantive conclusions, and often give rise to discussions which continue over several interchanges. A wide range of topics are covered including: philosophical logic and philosophy of language, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind, and moral philosophy.