Circularity is Still Scary

Análisis Filosófico 32 (1):31-35 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Cook (forthcoming) presents a paradox which he says is not circular. I see no reasons to doubt the non-circularity claim, but I do have some concerns regarding its paradoxicality. My point will be that his proposal succeeds in offering a formalization, but fails in providing a formal paradox, at least of the same type and strength as the Liar. Cook (en prensa) presenta una paradoja que según él no es circular. No veo motivos para cuestionar la pretensión de no circularidad, pero sí me resulta algo problemática la cuestión de su paradojicidad. El punto que intentaré defender será que la propuesta de Cook es exitosa en ofrecer una formalización, pero fracasa en proveer una paradoja formal, al menos del mismo tipo y fuerza que el mentiroso

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,888

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-09-28

Downloads
65 (#325,365)

6 months
13 (#257,195)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Paula Teijeiro
Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBA)

Citations of this work

About two Objections to Cook's Proposal.Federico Matías Pailos - 2012 - Análisis Filosófico 32 (1):37-43.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Paradox without Self-Reference.Stephen Yablo - 1993 - Analysis 53 (4):251-252.
Yablo's paradox.Graham Priest - 1997 - Analysis 57 (4):236-242.
Patterns of paradox.Roy T. Cook - 2004 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 69 (3):767-774.

Add more references