Korean Journal of Logic 21 (1):59-96 (2018)
Authors | |
Abstract |
It is often said that in a purely formal perspective, intuitionistic
logic has no obvious advantage to deal with the liar-type paradoxes. In this
paper, we will argue that the standard intuitionistic natural deduction systems
are vulnerable to the liar-type paradoxes in the sense that the acceptance of
the liar-type sentences results in inference to absurdity (⊥). The result shows
that the restriction of the Double Negation Elimination (DNE) fails to block
the inference to ⊥. It is, however, not the problem of the intuitionistic
approaches to the liar-type paradoxes but the lack of expressive power of the
standard intuitionistic natural deduction system.
We introduce a meta-level negation for a given system and a
meta-level absurdity, ⋏, to the intuitionistic system. We shall show that in the
system, the inference to ⊥ is not given without the assumption that the
system is complete. Moreover, we consider the Double Meta-Level Negation
Elimination rules (DMNE) which implicitly assume the completeness of the
system. Then, the restriction of DMNE can rule out the inference to ⊥.
|
Keywords | liar paradox strengthened liar paradox revenge liar natural deduction intuitionistic logic double negation elimination |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent.Graham Priest - 1987 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Oxford University Press.
Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study.Dag Prawitz - 1965 - Stockholm, Sweden: Dover Publications.
The Philosophical Basis of Intuitionistic Logic.Michael Dummett - 1975 - In Truth and Other Enigmas. Cambridge: Harvard UP. pp. 215--247.
View all 14 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
On Proof-Theoretic Approaches to the Paradoxes: Problems of Undergeneration and Overgeneration in the Prawitz-Tennant Analysis.Seungrak Choi - 2019 - Dissertation, Korea University
Tennant’s Conjecture for Self-Referential Paradoxes and its Classical Counterexample.Seungrak Choi - 2021 - Korean Journal of Logic 1 (24):1-30.
Similar books and articles
Liar-Type Paradoxes and the Incompleteness Phenomena.Makoto Kikuchi & Taishi Kurahashi - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 45 (4):381-398.
On the Storeyed Revenge of Strengthened Liars, and the Contrary Finality of No-Proposition Resolutions.Jordan Howard Sobel - manuscript
What the Liar Taught Achilles.Gary Mar & Paul St Denis - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 28 (1):29-46.
Natural Semantics: Why Natural Deduction is Intuitionistic.James W. Garson - 2001 - Theoria 67 (2):114-139.
Understanding the Liar.Douglas Patterson - 2007 - In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press. pp. 197.
Natural Deduction for Bi-Intuitionistic Logic.Luca Tranchini - 2017 - Journal of Applied Logic 25:S72-S96.
The Principle of Uniform Solution (of the Paradoxes of Self-Reference).Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2000 - Mind 109 (433):117-122.
Alethic Vengeance.Kevin Scharp - 2007 - In J. C. Beall (ed.), Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox. Oxford University Press.
Natural Deduction for Dual-Intuitionistic Logic.Luca Tranchini - 2012 - Studia Logica 100 (3):631-648.
An Illocutionary Logical Explanation of the Liar Paradox.John T. Kearns - 2007 - History and Philosophy of Logic 28 (1):31-66.
Dialetheism and the Graphic Liar.Greg Littmann - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):15-27.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2018-03-02
Total views
143 ( #80,861 of 2,499,746 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,066 of 2,499,746 )
2018-03-02
Total views
143 ( #80,861 of 2,499,746 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,066 of 2,499,746 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads