Insolubilia and the Fallacy Secundum Quid et Simpliciter
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Catarina Dutilh Novaes in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Stephen Read in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
Thomas Bradwardine makes much of the fact that his solution to the insolubles is in accordance with Aristotle's diagnosis of the fallacy in the Liar paradox as that of secundum quid et simpliciter. Paul Spade, however, claims that this invocation of Aristotle by Bradwardine is purely "honorary" in order to confer specious respectability on his analysis and give it a spurious weight of authority. Our answer to Spade follows Bradwardine's response to the problem of revenge: any proposition saying of itself that it is false says more than does Bradwardine's proposition saying of it that it is false, and so follows from that other proposition only in respect of part of what it says, and not simpliciter.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 562 | 71 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 227 | 3 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 83 | 10 | 0 |
Insolubilia and the Fallacy Secundum Quid et Simpliciter
In: VivariumSearch for other papers by Catarina Dutilh Novaes in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stephen Read in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
Thomas Bradwardine makes much of the fact that his solution to the insolubles is in accordance with Aristotle's diagnosis of the fallacy in the Liar paradox as that of secundum quid et simpliciter. Paul Spade, however, claims that this invocation of Aristotle by Bradwardine is purely "honorary" in order to confer specious respectability on his analysis and give it a spurious weight of authority. Our answer to Spade follows Bradwardine's response to the problem of revenge: any proposition saying of itself that it is false says more than does Bradwardine's proposition saying of it that it is false, and so follows from that other proposition only in respect of part of what it says, and not simpliciter.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 562 | 71 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 227 | 3 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 83 | 10 | 0 |