Truthmaker maximalism defended

Analysis 66 (3):260–264 (2006)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Peter Milne has tried to refure Truthmaker Maximalism. the thesis that every truth has a truthmaker, by producing a simple and direct counterexample to it, the sentence M: This sentence has no truthmaker. I argue that, contrary to what Milne argues, on Truthmaker Maximalism M is equivalent to the Liar, which gives the truthmaker maximalist a way to defend his position from Milne's counterexample: to argue that M expresses no proposition.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
RODTMD
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Why Truthmakers?Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra - 2005 - In Helen Beebee & Julian Dodd (eds.), Truthmakers: the contemporary debate. Oxford University Press. pp. 17-31.
Does This Sentence Have No Truthmaker?López de Sa, Dan & Zardini, Elia

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Truthmakers.Rodriguez-Pereyra, Gonzalo
The Hard Road to Presentism.Asay, Jamin & Baron, Sam
Much Ado About Aboutness.Baron, Sam; Chua, Reginald Mary; Miller, Kristie & Norton, James

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
415 ( #8,112 of 43,851 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
64 ( #10,252 of 43,851 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.