tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post7460219871445453785..comments2023-01-24T10:06:57.212-08:00Comments on (Blog&~Blog): My Take on the Liar Paradox (Part I of IV)Benhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06702722560438833244noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-16247245876597233462010-08-18T21:35:07.701-07:002010-08-18T21:35:07.701-07:00I will let you know when I get more time to think ...I will let you know when I get more time to think about it. I have all this information because it was part of my writing sample for grad school admissions (/worry).William Moore.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10996910425876231933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-13914345604145548762010-08-18T09:42:37.543-07:002010-08-18T09:42:37.543-07:00Thanks, William. I'll definitely check all of ...Thanks, William. I'll definitely check all of that out. I'd be interested in thinking about what you think of my take on sentences like L, which I presented in Part III.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06702722560438833244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-52779469853582707152010-08-11T22:01:13.339-07:002010-08-11T22:01:13.339-07:00The main article is:
"Inheritors and Paradox...The main article is:<br /><br />"Inheritors and Paradox", Journal of Philosophy, Vol. LXXIV, pp. 500-604, 1977. <br /><br />by Grover ;].William Moore.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10996910425876231933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-64866430462103875902010-08-11T21:54:48.392-07:002010-08-11T21:54:48.392-07:00Most all of her work can be found in her book A Pr...Most all of her work can be found in her book A Prosentential Theory of Truth, which, as far as the liar goes, has about two articles from her. She basically (and roughly) says that 'is true' is a prosentence that attaches nominal expressions like "That snow is white," whereby the sentence "That snow is white is true" is, like a pronoun, anaphorically linked with its antecedent "That snow is white." In the case of the liar, the prosentence is ungrounded, in the same way the following pronouns can be ungrounded:<br /><br />Sentence 1: The person you are about to refer to in your next sentence is female.<br />Sentence 2: No she is not.<br /><br />Her take on the liar is similar to Kripke's in that she takes the liar (and the strengthened liar) to be ungrounded (and without propositional content--which I think is where she differs with Kripke).<br /><br />She does however have another revenge problem:<br /><br />L: This sentence is ungrounded or it is false.<br /><br />Which she deals with in her book (not well imo).<br /><br />It's a good read. :D.William Moore.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10996910425876231933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-17395618996439750092010-08-11T04:14:09.123-07:002010-08-11T04:14:09.123-07:00I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know G...I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know Grover's stuff. Could you provide a reference?<br /><br />As far as Kripke goes, the difference between his view and the one I defend is that he takes "ungrounded" sentences to be meaningful--certainly, he takes them to be the sorts of things that can be meaningfully symbolized with Greek letters and plunked into a truth table--although (depending on one's interpretation) he takes them to have a third truth-value, or perhaps to lack a truth-value. (One way or the other, at the very least, it amounts to a denial of Bivalence.) That said, Kripke's deep influence on my preferred view on the paradoxes should be clear.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06702722560438833244noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2631035637795172582.post-39273837344901136632010-08-09T21:51:12.387-07:002010-08-09T21:51:12.387-07:00What you have to say about the infinite series of ...What you have to say about the infinite series of sentences (sentence 1: sentence 2 is true; sentence 2: sentence 3 is true; etc) is a lot like what Dorthy Grover talks about in her discussion on the liar. For her, these sentences, like Kripke, are just ungrounded. She has similar reasons for why they are ungrounded, because she is a deflationist, like Beall, but of the prosentential variety.William Moore.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10996910425876231933noreply@blogger.com