Wyclif and Paul of Venice on the liar paradox: a comparison [r-libre/3502]

Morneau-Guérin, Frédéric (2024). Wyclif and Paul of Venice on the liar paradox: a comparison [compte rendu de l'ouvrage de Conti, Alessandro D.]. Mathematical Reviews.

Fichier(s) associé(s) à ce document :

PDF - 5- PDF MathRev - 2024 - 2.pdf
Contenu du fichier : Version de l'éditeur
Accès restreint jusqu'à fin- janvier 2026.

Demander une copie

Catégorie de document :	Comptes rendus d'ouvrages
Évaluation par un comité de lecture :	Oui
Étape de publication :	Publié
Résumé :	That there is some sort of baffling logical short circuit to be found within sentences like `I am lying' or `this sentence is false' has been noted frequently and discussed abundantly throughout the history of human thought, notably by the Megarian school of philosophy. Late medieval authors were the first to consider the liar paradox as a veritable antinomy (in which the contradiction is deduced from reasoning which does not violate any logical principle and must therefore be judged valid) and to treat it accordingly. In this paper, the author considers two different medieval solutions to the paradox: (1) the one proposed by English Catholic priest and scholastic philosopher John Wyclif (ca. 1330–1384) in Chapter Eight of the third treatise of his Logicae Continuatio; and (2) the one developed by Italian Augustinian philosopher and theologian Paul of Venice (1369–1429) in the fifteenth treatise of the second part of his Logica Magna.
Informations complémentaires :	© Copyright American Mathematical Society 2024
Déposant:	Morneau-Guérin, Frédéric
Responsable :	Frédéric Morneau-Guérin
Dépôt :	26 nov. 2024 13:55
Dernière modification :	06 déc. 2024 12:36

Actions (connexion requise)

RÉVISER