Generalized Revenge

References

• Asenjo, F.G. 1966. A Calculus of Antinomies, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 7/1: 103–5. doi: 10.1305/ndjfl/1093958482
   Google Scholar
• Bacon, A. 2015. Can the Classical Logician Avoid the Revenge Paradoxes? The Philosophical Review 124/3: 299–352. doi: 10.1215/00318108-2895327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. 2007a. Prolegomenon to Future Revenge, in Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. 2007b. Truth and Paradox: A Philosophical Sketch, in Philosophy of Logic, ed. D. Jacquette, Amsterdam: Elsevier: 325–410.
   Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc., ed. 2007c. Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. 2009. Spandrels of Truth, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. 2011. Multiple-Conclusion LP and Default Classicality, The Review of Symbolic Logic 4/2: 326–36. doi: 10.1017/S1755020311000074
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. 2015. Trivializing Sentences and the Promise of Semantic Completeness, Analysis 75/4: 573–84. doi: 10.1093/analys/anv079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beall, Jc. and J. Murzi 2013. Two Flavors of Curry’s Paradox, The Journal of Philosophy 110/3: 143–65. doi: 10.5840/jphil2013110336
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cobreros, P., P. Egré, D. Ripley, and R. van Rooij 2012. Tolerant, Classical, Strict, Journal of Philosophical Logic 41/2: 347–85. doi: 10.1007/s10992-010-9165-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cobreros, P., P. Égré, D. Ripley, and R. van Rooij 2013. Reaching Transparent Truth, Mind 122/488: 841–66. doi: 10.1093/mind/fzt110
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feferman, S. 1984. Toward Useful Type-Free Theories, I, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 49: 75–111. doi: 10.2307/2274093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feferman, S. 1991. Reflecting on Incompleteness, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 56/1: 1–49. doi: 10.2307/2274902
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, H. 2002. Saving the Truth Schema from Paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic 31/1: 1–27. doi: 10.1023/A:1015063620612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, H. 2007. Solving the Paradoxes, Escaping Revenge, in Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 78–144.
   Google Scholar
• Field, H. 2008. Saving Truth from Paradox, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Field, H. 2013. Naive Truth and Restricted Quantification: Saving Truth a Whole Lot Better, The Review of Symbolic Logic 7/1: 147–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Field, H. 2017. Disarming a Paradox of Validity, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 58/1: 1–19. doi: 10.1215/00294527-3699865
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gauker, C. 2006. Against Stepping Back: A Critique of Contextualist Approaches to the Semantic Paradoxes, Journal of Philosophical Logic 35/4: 393–422. doi: 10.1007/s10992-006-9026-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glanzberg, M. 2004. A Contextual-Hierarchical Approach to Truth and the Liar Paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic 33/1: 27–88. doi: 10.1023/B:LOGI.0000019227.09236.f5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodship, L. 1996. On Dialetheism, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74/1: 153–61. doi: 10.1080/00048409612347131
   Google Scholar
• Halbach, V. 2011. Axiomatic Theories of Truth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halbach, V. and L. Horsten 2006. Axiomatizing Kripke’s Theory of Truth, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 71/2: 677–712. doi: 10.2178/jsl/1146620166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horsten, L. 2009. Levity, Mind 118/471: 555–81. doi: 10.1093/mind/fzp096
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horsten, L. 2011. The Tarskian Turn. Deflationism and Axiomatic Truth, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kleene, S.C. 1952. Introduction to Metamathematics, Groningen: North-Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Kripke, S. 1975. Outline of a Theory of Truth, The Journal of Philosophy 72/19: 690–716. doi: 10.2307/2024634
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitgeb, H. 2005. What Truth Depends On, Journal of Philosophical Logic 34/2: 155–92. doi: 10.1007/s10992-004-3758-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitgeb, H. 2007. On the Metatheory of Field’s ‘Solving the Paradoxes, Escaping Revenge’, in Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 159–83.
   Google Scholar
• Mares, E. and F. Paoli 2014. Logical Consequence and the Paradoxes, Journal of Philosophical Logic 43/2–3: 439–69. doi: 10.1007/s10992-013-9268-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGee, V. 1991. Truth, Vagueness, and Paradox: An Essay on the Logic of Truth, Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• McGee, V. 2010. Field’s Logic of Truth, Philosophical Studies 147/3: 421–32. doi: 10.1007/s11098-009-9467-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murzi, J. and L. Rossi 2018. Reflection Principles and the Liar in Context. Philosophers’ Imprint. 18/15: 1–18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murzi, J. and L. Rossi forthcoming. Naïve Validity, Synthese.
   Google Scholar
• Nicolai, C. and L. Rossi 2018, Principles for Object-Linguistic Consequence: From Logical to Irreflexive, Journal of Philosophical Logic 47/3: 549–77. doi: 10.1007/s10992-017-9438-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, C. 1974. The Liar Paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic 3/4: 381–412.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priest, G. 1979. The Logic of Paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic 8/1: 219–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priest, G. 2006a. Doubt Truth to Be a Liar, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Priest, G. 2006b. In Contradiction: A Study of the Transconsistent (expanded edn), Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Priest, G. 2007. Revenge, Field, and ZF, in Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 225–33.
   Google Scholar
• Rayo, A. and P.D. Welch 2007. Field on Revenge, in Revenge of the Liar: New Essays on the Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Oxford University Press: 234–49.
   Google Scholar
• Reinhardt, W. N. 1986. Some Remarks on Extending and Interpreting Theories with a Partial Predicate for Truth, Journal of Philosophical Logic 15/2: 219–51. doi: 10.1007/BF00305492
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripley, D. 2012. Conservatively Extending Classical Logic with Transparent Truth, Review of Symbolic Logic 5/2: 354–78. doi: 10.1017/S1755020312000056
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ripley, D. 2013. Paradoxes and Failures of Cut, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91/1: 139–64. doi: 10.1080/00048402.2011.630010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharp, K. 2013. Replacing Truth, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schroeder-Heister, P. 1984. A Natural Extension of Natural Deduction, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 49/4: 1284–300. doi: 10.2307/2274279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, L. 2011a. Deflating Logical Consequence, The Philosophical Quarterly 61/243: 320–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9213.2010.678.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shapiro, L. 2011b. Expressibility and the Liar’s Revenge, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89/2: 297–314. doi: 10.1080/00048401003695156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarski, A. 1936. Der Wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten Sprachen. Studia Philosophica Commentarii Societatis Philosophicae Polonorum 1: 261-405, trans. as ‘The Concept of Truth in Formalized Languages’ in Tarski [1956: 152–278].
   Google Scholar
• Tarski, A. 1956. Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tennant, N. 1982. Proof and Paradox, Dialectica 36/2–3: 265–96. doi: 10.1111/j.1746-8361.1982.tb00820.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennant, N. 2012. Cut for Core Logic, The Review of Symbolic Logic 5/3: 450–79. doi: 10.1017/S1755020311000360
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennant, N. 2015. A New Unified Account of Truth and Paradox, Mind 124/494: 571–605. doi: 10.1093/mind/fzu179
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weir, A. 2005. Naïve Truth and Sophisticated Logic, in Deflationism and Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall and B. Armour-Garb, Oxford: Clarendon Press: 218–49.
   Google Scholar
• Welch, P. 2008. Ultimate Truth vis à vis Stable Truth, The Review of Symbolic Logic 1/1: 126–42. doi: 10.1017/S1755020308080118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welch, P. 2014. Some Observations on Truth Hierarchies, The Review of Symbolic Logic 7/1: 1–30. doi: 10.1017/S1755020313000361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods, J. forthcoming. Logical Partisanhood, Philosophical Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Yablo, S. 2003. New Grounds for Naïve Truth Theory, in Liars and Heaps: New Essays on Paradox, ed. Jc. Beall, Oxford: Clarendon Press: 312–30.
   Google Scholar
• Zardini, E. 2011. Truth without Contra(di)ction, The Review of Symbolic Logic 4/4: 498–535. doi: 10.1017/S1755020311000177
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zardini, E. 2014. Naïve Truth and Naïve Logical Properties, The Review of Symbolic Logic 7/2: 351–84. doi: 10.1017/S1755020314000045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar