I recently came across the following abstract of a paper on the notorious Liar paradox:
The Liar sentence is a singularly important piece of philosophical evidence. It is an instrument for investigating the metaphysics of expressing truths and falsehoods. And an instrument too for investigating the varieties of conflict that can give rise to paradox. It shall serve as perhaps the most important clue to the shape of human judgment, as well as to the nature of the dependence of judgment upon language use.
I don't know what the author of the paper is saying about the sentence "This is a lie," but I am struck by the phrase "piece of philosophical evidence." At law, an utterance is often evidence. Or a text. But the say that a "sentence" is "evidence" is, fittingly, more abstract.
What does "evidence" mean in that sentence? And is it the same as the usage of "evidence" in the following sentence: "The DNA evidence showed clearly that Jon Paul had been in the room at some time." ?
Comments
Post a Comment