Talk:Liar paradox

{{Pin message|}}{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|2015661040}}

Please feel free to add entries and comments (discussions elsewhere on this talkpage, please) to this list.

• {{cite book

|editor1-last=Beall

|editor1-first=J. C.

|title=Revenge of the liar: new essays on the paradox

|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=IkxJJ3BUgeoC

|accessdate=18 March 2010

|date=13 December 2007

|publisher=Oxford University Press

|isbn=9780199233908}}

: Review: {{cite journal

| last = Horsten

| first = Leon

| date = 17 May 2009

| title = Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox - Reviewed by Leon Horsten, University of Bristol/University of Leuven

| journal = Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews

| publisher = Philosophy Department, University of Notre Dame

| location = Notre Dame, Indiana 46556

| issn = 1538-1617

| url = http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=16066

| accessdate = 18 March 2010

| archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/5oKb5ZM8k

| archivedate = 18 March 2010

}}

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on Liar paradox. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=707195645 my edit]. If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110816043742/http://files.davidsanson.com/research/ArabicLiar.pdf to http://files.davidsanson.com/research/ArabicLiar.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

{{sourcecheck|checked=true}}

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:25, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Irvine's proposed solution to the paradox is listed as a "non-cognitivist" solution. It's not clear why, though. I presume it is in reference to the cognitivist theory of ethics, but I'm not sure such a reference is appropriate. Maybe "non-truth-conditional" would be more appropriate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrilway (talk • contribs) 15:28, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

In the section on Arthur Prior, there are no sources? I've taken a look round the internet but every mention of him seems to just link back to this article, and I can't find anything about him and the liar paradox outside of it.

Also no sources for Charles Sanders Pierce and John Buridan, which seem equally recursive in my brief search on them. 192.76.8.84 (talk) 11:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

:the closest thing I've been able to find is this extract by Roy A. Sorensen in the Oxford Handbook of Truth

:"The medieval logician Jean Buridan’s solution was to challenge this synonymy. His differentiator is the narcissistic principle that every statement implies its own truth- a principle that continues to attract adherents such as Eugene Mills (1998)."

:then later

:"According to Buridan, proposition P implicitly ascribes truth to itself" 192.76.8.81 (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

:: {{resolved}} Added a source for Prior. Happy editing, Paradoctor (talk) 09:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

If separate articles "Liar paradox" and "Epimenides paradox" are neeced they should have pointers to each other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:14BB:159:FD1:1C7C:5535:AF23:D550 (talk) 12:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

:They have. 🤷 Paradoctor (talk) 12:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)