Is the Liar Paradox Never Strictly Classical?
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The present paper investigates whether strictly classical inferences contribute to the formalization of (genuine) paradoxes within natural deduction. Tennant's criterion for paradoxicality relies on the generation of an infinite reduction sequence, which distinguishes genuine paradoxes from mere inconsistencies. His methodological conjecture posits that genuine paradoxes are never strictly classical and can be derived without classical inferences such as the Law of Excluded Middle, Dilemma, Classical Reductio, and Double Negation Elimination. It appears that there were two reasons for Tennant's proposal of the methodological conjecture. The one is that strictly classical inferences hinder the generation of an infinite reduction sequence and the other is that strictly classical inferences have no role in the formalization of genuine paradoxes. This paper raises questions about these two reasons. Focusing on the liar paradox, it will be argued that strictly classical inferences do not interfere with the generation of an infinite reduction sequence and that the liar sentence may implicitly entail strictly classical inferences. Should this analysis hold, it would call into question not only Tennant’s motivation for advancing the methodological conjecture, but also challenge his contention that genuine paradoxes—exemplified by the liar paradox—are never constructed with reliance on strictly classical inferences.
Abstract
The present paper investigates whether strictly classical inferences contribute to the formalization of (genuine) paradoxes within natural deduction. Tennant's criterion for paradoxicality relies on the generation of an infinite reduction sequence, which distinguishes genuine paradoxes from mere inconsistencies. His methodological conjecture posits that genuine paradoxes are never strictly classical and can be derived without classical inferences such as the Law of Excluded Middle, Dilemma, Classical Reductio, and Double Negation Elimination. It appears that there were two reasons for Tennant's proposal of the methodological conjecture. The one is that strictly classical inferences hinder the generation of an infinite reduction sequence and the other is that strictly classical inferences have no role in the formalization of genuine paradoxes. This paper raises questions about these two reasons. Focusing on the liar paradox, it will be argued that strictly classical inferences do not interfere with the generation of an infinite reduction sequence and that the liar sentence may implicitly entail strictly classical inferences. Should this analysis hold, it would call into question not only Tennant’s motivation for advancing the methodological conjecture, but also challenge his contention that genuine paradoxes—exemplified by the liar paradox—are never constructed with reliance on strictly classical inferences.
참고문헌 (29)
- Choi, S., "Liar-Type Paradoxes and Intuitionistic Natural Deduction Systems", Korean Journal of Logic, 21(1), pp.59~96 (2018)
- Choi, S., "On Proof-Theoretic Approaches to the Paradoxes: Problems of Undergeneration and Overgeneration in the Prawitz-Tennant Analysis", Doctor, pp.2019
- Choi, S., "Tennant’s Conjecture for Self-Referential Paradoxes and its Classical Counterexample", Korean Journal of Logic, 24(1), pp.1~30 (2021)
- Choi, S., "Which Paradox is Genuine in Accordance with the Proof-Theoretic Criterion for Paradoxicality", Korean Journal of Logic, 26(3), pp.145~181 (2023)
- Dummett, M., "The Seas of Language" (1993), Clarendon Press
- Ekman, J., "Propositions in Propositional Logic Provable Only by Indirect Proof", Mathematical Logic Quarterly, 44(1), pp.69~91 (1998)
- Field, H., "Saving Truth from Paradox" (2008), Oxford University Press
- Fitch, F. B., "Symbolic Logic : An Introduction" (1952), the Ronald Press
- Martin-Löf, P., "Hauptsatz for the intuitionistic theory of iterated inductive definitions", Proceedings of the 2nd Scandinavian Logic Symposium, pp.179~216 (1971)
- Milne, P., "Classical Harmony : Rules of Inference and the Meaning of the Logical Constants", Synthese, 100, pp.49~94 (1994)
- Prawitz, D., "Natural Deduction: A Proof-Theoretical Study" (1965), Dover Publications
- Read, S., "Harmonic Inferentialism and the Logic of Identity", The Review of Symbolic Logic, 9(2), pp.408~420 (2016)
- Schroeder-Heister, P., "A Natural Extension of Natural Deduction", The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 49, pp.1284~1300 (1984)
- Schroeder-Heister, P., "Generalized Rules for Quantifiers and the Completeness of the Intuitionistic Operators ∧, ∨, →, ⊥, ∀, ∃", Computation and Proof Theory, 58(4), pp.399~426 (1984)
- Schroeder-Heister, P., "Ekman’s Paradox", Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 58(4), pp.567~581 (2017)
- Schroeder-Heister, P, "How to Ekman a Crabbé-Tennant", Synthese (2018)[DOI]
- Stålmark, G., "Normalization Theorems for Full First Order Classical Natural Deduction", The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 56(1), pp.129~149 (1991)
- Tennant, N., "Proof and Paradox", Dialectica, 36, pp.265~296 (1982)
- Tennant, N., "On ParadoxWithout Self-Reference", Analysis, 55(3), pp.199~207 (1995)
- Tennant, N., "The Law of Excluded Middle is Synthetic A Priori, If Valid", Philosophical Topics, 24(1), pp.205~229 (1996)
- Tennant, N., "Taming of the True" (2002), Oxford University Press
- Tennant, N., "Existence and Identity in Free Logic : a Problem for Inferentialism?", Mind, 116(464), pp.1055~1078 (2007)
- Tennant, N., "A New Unified Account of Truth and Paradox", Mind, 124, pp.571~605 (2015)
- Tennant, N., "Cut for classical core logic", The Review of Symbolic Logic, 80(2), pp.236~256 (2015)
- Tennant, N., "The Relevance of Premises to Conclusions of Core Proofs", The Review of Symbolic Logic, 80(4), pp.743~784 (2015)
- Tennant, N., "Normalizability, Cut Eliminability and Paradox", Synthese (2016)[DOI]
- Tennant, N., "Core Logic" (2017), Oxford University Press
- Tennant, N., "What is a rule of inference?", The Review of Symbolic Logic, 14(2), pp.307~346 (2021)
- Williamson, T., "Indefinitely Extensible", Grazer Philosophische Studien, 55, pp.1~24 (1998)