Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T11:35:28.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

REASSURANCE FOR THE LOGIC OF PARADOX

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2011

MARCEL CRABBÉ
MARCEL CRABBÉ*
Affiliation:
Institut supérieur de Philosophie Université catholique de Louvain
*
*CENTRE DE LOGIQUE/INSTITUT SUPÉRIEUR DE PHILOSOPHIE, UNIVERSITÉ CATHOLIQUE DE LOUVAIN, PLACE MERCIER 14, 1348 LOUVAIN-1A-NEUVE, BELGIUM. E-mail:marcel.crabbe@uclouvain.be
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Counterexamples to reassurance relative to a “less inconsistent” relation between models of the logic of paradox are provided. Another relation, designed to fix the problem in logic without equality, is introduced and discussed in connection with the issue of classical recapture.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Symbolic Logic , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 2011 , pp. 479 - 485
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Batens, D. (2000). Minimally abnormal models in some adaptive logics. Synthese, 125, 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G. (1991). Minimally inconsistent LP. Studia Logica: An International Journal for Symbolic Logic, 50, 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Priest, G. (2006). In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent (second edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar