發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-26 14:49

【摘要】：在對(duì)模糊性和連鎖悖論的研究中,威廉姆森先后構(gòu)造了三個(gè)論證去表明:否定二值原則將導(dǎo)致邏輯矛盾,亦稱"荒謬"。本文論證以下兩個(gè)斷言:(1)在一個(gè)良好設(shè)計(jì)且能得到很好證成的三值邏輯中,否定二值原則并不會(huì)導(dǎo)致荒謬;(2)在威廉姆森的論證中,某些推理步驟只在二值的經(jīng)典邏輯中有效,而在某些非二值邏輯中無效;那些論證使用了塔斯基的"真"去引號(hào)模式,后者本身就預(yù)設(shè)了二值原則。因此,威廉姆森的三個(gè)論證幾乎是直接的循環(huán)論證:在假定二值原則之后,再證明否定二值原則將導(dǎo)致荒謬。本文最后列出了據(jù)以反駁威廉姆森論證的一些思想,并為它們提供了簡短的證成和辯護(hù)。
[Abstract]:In the study of fuzziness and chain paradox, Williamson has constructed three arguments to show that negating the binary principle will lead to logical contradiction, also known as "absurdity". This paper demonstrates the following two assertions: (1) in a well-designed and well-proved ternary logic, the negation of the binary principle does not lead to absurdity; (2) in Williamson's argument, some reasoning steps are only valid in classical binary logic. Not in some non-binary logic; those arguments use Tasky's "true" quoted pattern, which itself presupposes the binary principle. Therefore, Williamson's three arguments are almost direct circulatory arguments: after assuming the binary principle, the negation of the binary principle will lead to absurdity. At the end of this paper, some ideas which refute Williamson's argument are listed, and brief evidences and justifications are provided for them.
【作者單位】： 北京大學(xué)哲學(xué)系;
【基金】：國家社會(huì)科學(xué)基金重點(diǎn)研究項(xiàng)目(哲學(xué)類)(12AZD072)和(12AZX008)
【分類號(hào)】：B815

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 尼古拉斯·G.奧努弗;孫吉?jiǎng)?;建構(gòu)主義的哲學(xué)淵源探析[J];世界經(jīng)濟(jì)與政治;2006年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：2205203