A Comparative Taxonomy of Medieval and Modern Approaches to Liar Sentences |
| |
Authors: | C. Dutilh Novaes |
| |
Affiliation: | Department of Philosophy , University of Amsterdam , Nieuwe Doelenstraat 15 1012 CP, Amsterdam, The Netherlands |
| |
Abstract: | Two periods in the history of logic and philosophy are characterized notably by vivid interest in self-referential paradoxical sentences in general, and Liar sentences in particular: the later medieval period (roughly from the 12th to the 15th century) and the last 100 years. In this paper, I undertake a comparative taxonomy of these two traditions. I outline and discuss eight main approaches to Liar sentences in the medieval tradition, and compare them to the most influential modern approaches to such sentences. I also emphasize the aspects of each tradition that find no counterpart in the other one. It is expected that such a comparison may point in new directions for future research on the paradoxes; indeed, the present analysis allows me to draw a few conclusions about the general nature of Liar sentences, and to identify aspects that would require further investigation. |
| |
Keywords: | |
|
|