Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorScharp, Kevin
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-06T00:34:46Z
dc.date.available2020-02-06T00:34:46Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-01
dc.identifier252071293
dc.identifierc4685efd-74c7-40b5-b4f0-64ed09bbd5ab
dc.identifier85055276145
dc.identifier000440976400009
dc.identifier.citationScharp , K 2018 , ' Shrieking in the face of vengeance ' , Analysis , vol. 78 , no. 3 , anx163 , pp. 454-463 . https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anx163en
dc.identifier.issn0003-2638
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0003-3900-4087/work/69029521
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/19415
dc.description.abstractParaconsistent dialetheism is the view that some contradictions are true and that the inference rule ex falso quod libet (a.k.a. explosion) is invalid. A long-standing problem for paraconsistent dialetheism is that it has difficulty making sense of situations where people use locutions like ‘just true’ and ‘just false’. Jc Beall recently advocated a general strategy, which he terms shrieking, for solving this problem and thereby strengthening the case for paraconsistent dialetheism. However, Beall’s strategy fails, and seeing why it fails brings into greater focus just how daunting the just-true problem is for the dialetheist.
dc.format.extent195591
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAnalysisen
dc.subjectTruthen
dc.subjectLiar paradoxen
dc.subjectDialetheismen
dc.subjectParaconsistencyen
dc.subjectRevenge paradoxen
dc.subjectShriek ruleen
dc.subjectB Philosophy (General)en
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subject.lccB1en
dc.titleShrieking in the face of vengeanceen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. St Andrews Centre for Exoplanet Scienceen
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/analys/anx163
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.date.embargoedUntil2020-02-06


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record