Uploaded October 2024 | Updated September 2026, 1 day ago
Recorded as part of the CFvW Colloquium on October 30, 2024
Naive non-substructural solutions to the Validity Paradox (plus an informational application) - Dr. Federico Pailos (University of Tübingen)
Abstract:
I will present naive non-substructural solutions to the Validity Paradox. The main idea behind these solutions is to break up the link between a valuation satisfying an inference and a valuation not being a counterexample to that inference. A philosophical consequence of this technical move is that, in some of these theories, VD will be valid while at the same time invalid, while in others VD won't be invalid, though it will not be valid either. No matter what path is chosen, it will not be possible to have the problematic instances of VD as axioms of the derivations that lead to the paradoxical result. The first one cannot have them as axioms because the problematic instances are not valid, and the second one cannot have them either because they are invalid. Given the details of these proposals, new forms of both (i) naive validity, and (ii) non-substructurality arise. Moreover, validity gaps and gluts might represent the informational state of a computer regarding a particular way to process such absence of information or contradictory information.
Explore our colloquium schedule on our website:. uni-tuebingen.de/en/research/centers-and-institutes/carl-friedrich-von-weizsaecker-center/news-and-events/carl-friedrich-von-weizsaecker-colloquium
Recorded as part of the CFvW Colloquium on October 30, 2024
Naive non-substructural solutions to the Validity Paradox (plus an informational application) - Dr. Federico Pailos (University of Tübingen)
Abstract:
I will present naive non-substructural solutions to the Validity Paradox. The main idea behind these solutions is to break up the link between a valuation satisfying an inference and a valuation not being a counterexample to that inference. A philosophical consequence of this technical move is that, in some of these theories, VD will be valid while at the same time invalid, while in others VD won't be invalid, though it will not be valid either. No matter what path is chosen, it will not be possible to have the problematic instances of VD as axioms of the derivations that lead to the paradoxical result. The first one cannot have them as axioms because the problematic instances are not valid, and the second one cannot have them either because they are invalid. Given the details of these proposals, new forms of both (i) naive validity, and (ii) non-substructurality arise. Moreover, validity gaps and gluts might represent the informational state of a computer regarding a particular way to process such absence of information or contradictory information.
Explore our colloquium schedule on our website:. uni-tuebingen.de/en/research/centers-and-institutes/carl-friedrich-von-weizsaecker-center/news-and-events/carl-friedrich-von-weizsaecker-colloquium
