Korean Journal of Logic 1 (24):1-30 (2021)

In his paper, “On paradox without self-reference”, Neil Tennant proposed the conjecture for self-referential paradoxes that any derivation formalizing self-referential paradoxes only generates a looping reduction sequence. According to him, the derivation of the Liar paradox in natural deduction initiates a looping reduction sequence and the derivation of the Yablo's paradox generates a spiral reduction. The present paper proposes the counterexample to Tennant's conjecture for self-referential paradoxes. We shall show that there is a derivation of the Liar paradox which generates a spiraling reduction procedure. Since the Liar paradox is a self-referential paradox, the result is a counterexample to his conjecture. Tennant has believed that classical reductio has no essential role to formalize paradoxes. As our counterexample applies the rule of classical reductio, he may reject the counterexample. In this sense, it will be briefly argued that classical reductio and his rules for the liar sentence share some inferential role. If classical reductio should not be used in paradoxical reasoning, neither should be his rules for the liar sentence.
Keywords The liar paradox  yablo's paradox  neil tennant   Gunnar Stålmarck   Classical reductio  Self-reference
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: 68,944
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

Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study.Dag Prawitz - 1965 - Stockholm, Sweden: Dover Publications.
Paradox Without Self-Reference.Stephen Yablo - 1993 - Analysis 53 (4):251.
Logic and Structure.D. van Dalen - 1980 - Springer Verlag.
Ideas and Results in Proof Theory.Dag Prawitz & J. E. Fenstad - 1975 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 40 (2):232-234.
Core Logic.Neil Tennant - 2017 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Equiparadoxicality of Yablo’s Paradox and the Liar.Ming Hsiung - 2013 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 22 (1):23-31.
Curry, Yablo and Duality.Roy T. Cook - 2009 - Analysis 69 (4):612-620.
Liar-Type Paradoxes and the Incompleteness Phenomena.Makoto Kikuchi & Taishi Kurahashi - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 45 (4):381-398.
What Paradoxes Depend On.Ming Hsiung - 2018 - Synthese:1-27.
Liar Paradox.Bradley Dowden - 2001 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Yablo’s Paradox and Russellian Propositions.Gregory Landini - 2008 - Russell: The Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies 28 (2).
Бесконечный Лжец.Vsevolod Ladov - 2014 - Schole 8 (2):285-292.
Yablo's Paradox and Referring to Infinite Objects.O. Bueno & M. Colyvan - 2003 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (3):402 – 412.
The Liar Paradox in New Clothes.Jeff Snapper - 2012 - Analysis 72 (2):319-322.
Paradoxical Hypodoxes.Alexandre Billon - 2019 - Synthese 196 (12):5205-5229.


Added to PP index

Total views
18 ( #604,948 of 2,498,140 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #118,816 of 2,498,140 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes