Korean Journal of Logic 20 (2):241-271 (2017)

Dialetheism is the view that there exists a true contradiction. This paper ventures to suggest that Priest’s argument for Dialetheism from Gödel’s theorem is unconvincing as the lesson of Gödel’s proof (or Rosser’s proof) is that any sufficiently strong theories of arithmetic cannot be both complete and consistent. In addition, a contradiction is derivable in Priest’s inconsistent and complete arithmetic. An alternative argument for Dialetheism is given by applying Gödel sentence to the inconsistent and complete theory of arithmetic. We argue, however, that the alternative argument raises a circularity problem. In sum, Gödel’s and its related theorem merely show the relation between a complete and a consistent theory. A contradiction derived by the application of Gödel sentence has the value of true sentences, i.e. the both-value, only under the inconsistent models for arithmetic. Without having the assumption of inconsistency or completeness, a true contradiction is not derivable from the application of Gödel sentence. Hence, Gödel’s and its related theorem never can be a ground for Dialetheism.
Keywords Gödel’s incompleteness theorem  Rosser’s incompleteness theorem  Dialetheism  Inconsistent arithmetic
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,043
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

In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent.Graham Priest - 1987 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Oxford University Press.
The Logic of Paradox.Graham Priest - 1979 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1):219 - 241.
Minimally Inconsistent LP.Graham Priest - 1991 - Studia Logica 50 (2):321 - 331.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

On the Philosophical Relevance of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorems.Panu Raatikainen - 2005 - Revue Internationale de Philosophie 59 (4):513-534.
Kurt Gödel, Paper on the Incompleteness Theorems (1931).Richard Zach - 2005 - In Ivor Grattan-Guinness (ed.), Landmark Writings in Mathematics. Amsterdam: North-Holland. pp. 917-925.
On Gödel Sentences and What They Say.Peter Milne - 2007 - Philosophia Mathematica 15 (2):193-226.
Heterologicality and Incompleteness.Cezary Cieśliński - 2002 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 48 (1):105-110.
Incompleteness and Inconsistency.Stewart Shapiro - 2002 - Mind 111 (444):817-832.
The Scope of Gödel’s First Incompleteness Theorem.Bernd Buldt - 2014 - Logica Universalis 8 (3-4):499-552.
Query the Triple Loophole of the Proof of Gödel Incompleteness Theorem.Fangwen Yuan - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 41:77-94.
A Note on Boolos' Proof of the Incompleteness Theorem.Makoto Kikuchi - 1994 - Mathematical Logic Quarterly 40 (4):528-532.
The Gödel Paradox and Wittgenstein's Reasons.Francesco Berto - 2009 - Philosophia Mathematica 17 (2):208-219.
Socrates Did It Before Gödel.Josef Wolfgang Degen - 2011 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (3):205-214.


Added to PP index

Total views
216 ( #51,798 of 2,498,570 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #140,198 of 2,498,570 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes