- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
True, false, paranormal and 'designated'?: A reply to Jenkins
Analysis 68 (3):238–244 (2008)
Abstract
Jenkins (2007) charges that the language advanced in Beall (2007) is either expressively impoverished, or inconsistent. We argue that Jenkins’ objections are based on unreasonably strong constraints on formal theories of truth. Our primary concern is not to defend the ‘paranormal’ framework advanced in Beall, but to respond to a common – and implausible – ‘revenge’-style charge directed at a certain class of formal theories of truth and paradox.Author Profiles
Links
PhilArchive
External links
- From the Publisher via CrossRef (no proxy)
- analysis.oxfordjournals.org (no proxy)
- analysis.oxfordjournals.org [2] (no proxy)
- analysis.oxfordjournals.org [3] (no proxy)
- analysis.oxfordjournals.org [4] (no proxy)
- dx.doi.org (no proxy)
- hdl.handle.net
(no proxy) - jstor.org (no proxy)
- interscience.wiley.com (no proxy)
- academic.oup.com (no proxy)
- research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk (no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
True, False, Paranormal and Designated: A Reply to Beall.C. S. Jenkins - 2007 - Analysis 67 (1):80 - 83.
Revenge of the liar: new essays on the paradox.J. C. Beall (ed.) - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Nothing but the Truth.Andreas Pietz & Umberto Rivieccio - 2013 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (1):125-135.
Critical notice of spandrels of truth by J.c. Beall.C. S. Jenkins - 2010 - Philosophical Books 51 (4):245-254.
Truth pluralism and many-valued logics: A reply to Beall.Christine Tappolet - 2000 - Philosophical Quarterly 50 (200):382-385.
Reductive theories of modality.Theodore Sider - 2003 - In Michael J. Loux & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press. pp. 180-208.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
110 (#157,466)
6 months
27 (#108,043)
2009-01-28
Downloads
110 (#157,466)
6 months
27 (#108,043)
Historical graph of downloads
Author Profiles
Citations of this work
Validity for Strong Pluralists.Aaron J. Cotnoir - 2013 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (3):563-579.
Pluralism and Paradox.Aaron J. Cotnoir - 2012 - In Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen & Cory Wright (eds.), Truth and Pluralism: Current Debates. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. pp. 339.
Expressibility and the Liar's Revenge.Lionel Shapiro - 2011 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (2):297-314.
Truth Pluralism and Many-Valued Logic: Lesson from Suszko’s Thesis.Andrea Strollo - 2021 - Philosophical Quarterly 72 (1):155-176.
The importance of being designated: a comment on Caret and Cotnoir.C. S. Jenkins - 2008 - Analysis 68 (3):244-247.
References found in this work
Revenge of the liar: new essays on the paradox.J. C. Beall (ed.) - 2007 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Is Meaning Normative?Paul Boghossian - 2005 - In Nimtz Christian & Beckermann Ansgar (eds.), Philosophy – Science – Scientific Philosophy. Main Lectures and Colloquia of GAP.5, Fifth International Congress of the Society for Analytical Philosophy, Bielefeld, 22–26 September 2003. Paperborn. pp. 205-218.
Solving the paradoxes, escaping revenge.Hartry Field - 2007 - In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-7c76586df8-5tf24 uwo