Collecting truths: A paradox in two guises

Analytic Philosophy 63 (3):156-173 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Two proofs are given which show that if some set of truths fall under finitely many concepts (so-called Collectivity), then they all fall under at least one of them even if we do not know which one. Examples are given in which the result seems paradoxical. The first proof crucially involves Moorean propositions while the second is a reconstruction and generalization of a proof due to Humberstone free from any reference to such propositions. We survey a few solution routes including Tennant-style restriction strategies. It is concluded that accepting Collectivity for some set of truths while also denying that any of the involved concepts in isolation capture all of them requires that one of these concepts cannot be closed under conjunction elimination. This is surprising since the paper surveys several applications in which Collectivity and the latter closure condition seemed jointly satisfiable for concepts of actual philosophical interest.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Knowability Paradox and Unsuccessful Updates.Arkadiusz Wójcik - 2020 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 62 (1):53-71.
Fitch's Paradox of Knowability.Berit Brogaard & Joe Salerno - 2010 - The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Perfected Science and the Knowability Paradox.Massimiliano Carrara & Davide Fassio - 2010 - In M. M. D’Agostino, G. Giorello, F. Laudisa, T. Pievani & C. Sinigaglia (eds.), New Essays in Logic and Philosophy of Science. London College Publications.
The Knowability Paradox in the light of a Logic for Pragmatics.Massimiliano Carrara & Daniele Chiffi - 2014 - In Roberto Ciuni, Heinrich Wansing & Caroline Willkommen (eds.), Recent Trends in Philosophical Logic (Proceedings of Trends in Logic XI). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp. 47-58.
The Abridgement Paradox.Roy Sorensen - 2019 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 97 (3):572-588.
The Paradox of Sufficient Reason.Samuel Levey - 2016 - Philosophical Review Recent Issues 125 (3):397-430.
Knowability, possibility and paradox.Berit Brogaard & Joe Salerno - 2007 - In Vincent Hendricks & Duncan Pritchard (eds.), New Waves in Epistemology. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 270-299.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-05-15

Downloads
64 (#243,546)

6 months
11 (#196,102)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eric Updike
Glendale Community College

Citations of this work

Humberstone’s Paradox and Conjunction.Eric T. Updike - 2024 - Erkenntnis 89 (3):1183-1195.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge and Its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Philosophy 76 (297):460-464.
Knowledge and its Limits.Timothy Williamson - 2000 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 64 (1):200-201.
A reply to my critics.George Edward Moore - 1942 - In Paul Arthur Schilpp (ed.), The philosophy of G. E. Moore. New York,: Tudor Pub. Co..
A logical analysis of some value concepts.Frederic Fitch - 1963 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 28 (2):135-142.
Blindspots.Roy Sorensen - 1990 - Mind 99 (393):137-140.

View all 16 references / Add more references