On 'the denial of bivalence is absurd'

Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (3):369 – 382 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Timothy Williamson, in various places, has put forward an argument that is supposed to show that denying bivalence is absurd. This paper is an examination of the logical force of this argument, which is found wanting.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,561

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
160 (#142,983)

6 months
6 (#809,985)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Stainton
Western University

Citations of this work

Sorites paradox.Dominic Hyde - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Is vagueness Sui generis ?David Barnett - 2009 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):5 – 34.
Sorites Paradox.Dominic Hyde & Diana Raffman - 2012 - In Ed Zalta (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford, CA: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Deconstructing the Laws of Logic.Stephen R. Clark - 2008 - Philosophy 83 (1):25-53.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Vagueness and ignorance.Timothy Williamson - 2010 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Arguing about language. New York: Routledge. pp. 145 - 177.
The sorites paradox.James Cargile - 1969 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 20 (3):193-202.

Add more references