Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Buttresses of the Turing Barrier.Paolo Cotogno - 2015 - Acta Analytica 30 (3):275-282.
    The ‘Turing barrier’ is an evocative image for 0′, the degree of the unsolvability of the halting problem for Turing machines—equivalently, of the undecidability of Peano Arithmetic. The ‘barrier’ metaphor conveys the idea that effective computability is impaired by restrictions that could be removed by infinite methods. Assuming that the undecidability of PA is essentially depending on the finite nature of its computational means, decidability would be restored by the ω-rule. Hypercomputation, the hypothetical realization of infinitary machines through relativistic and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Content Implication and the Yablo’s Sequent of Sentences.Piotr Łukowski - forthcoming - Logic and Logical Philosophy:1.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Yablo’s Paradox and Beginningless Time.Laureano Luna - 2009 - Disputatio 3 (26):89-96.
    The structure of Yablo’s paradox is analysed and generalised in order to show that beginningless step-by-step determination processes can be used to provoke antinomies, more concretely, to make our logical and our on-tological intuitions clash. The flow of time and the flow of causality are usually conceived of as intimately intertwined, so that temporal causation is the very paradigm of a step-by-step determination process. As a conse-quence, the paradoxical nature of beginningless step-by-step determina-tion processes concerns time and causality as usually (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Paradox by definition.H. Leitgeb - 2005 - Analysis 65 (4):275-278.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Paradox by (non-wellfounded) definition.Hannes Leitgeb - 2005 - Analysis 65 (4):275–278.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Equiparadoxicality of Yablo’s Paradox and the Liar.Ming Hsiung - 2013 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 22 (1):23-31.
    It is proved that Yablo’s paradox and the Liar paradox are equiparadoxical, in the sense that their paradoxicality is based upon exactly the same circularity condition—for any frame ${\mathcal{K}}$ , the following are equivalent: (1) Yablo’s sequence leads to a paradox in ${\mathcal{K}}$ ; (2) the Liar sentence leads to a paradox in ${\mathcal{K}}$ ; (3) ${\mathcal{K}}$ contains odd cycles. This result does not conflict with Yablo’s claim that his sequence is non-self-referential. Rather, it gives Yablo’s paradox a new significance: (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Semantic Paradox: A Comparative Analysis of Scholastic and Analytic Views.Miroslav Hanke - 2014 - Res Philosophica 91 (3):367-386.
    Scholastic and analytic definitions of semantic paradoxes, in terms of groundlessness, circularity, and semantic pathology, are introduced and compared with each other. The fundamental intuitions used in these definitions are the concepts of being true about extralinguistic reality, of making statements about one’s self, and of compatibility with an underlying semantic theory. The three approaches—the groundlessness view, the circularity view, and the semantic pathology view—are shown to differ not only conceptually, but also in their applications. As both a means for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Semantic objects and paradox: a study of Yablo's omega-liar.Benjamin John Hassman - unknown
    To borrow a colorful phrase from Kant, this dissertation offers a prolegomenon to any future semantic theory. The dissertation investigates Yablo's omega-liar paradox and draws the following consequence. Any semantic theory that accepts the existence of semantic objects must face Yablo's paradox. The dissertation endeavors to position Yablo's omega-liar in a role analogous to that which Russell's paradox has for the foundations of mathematics. Russell's paradox showed that if we wed mathematics to sets, then because of the many different possible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark