[FOM] Bivalence and Law of Excluded Middle
joseph.vidal-rosset at univ-nancy2.fr
Mon Feb 18 10:22:15 EST 2008
In 1989 Sayward wrote:
> Call a statement truth definite if it or its negation is true.
> Call a language bivalent if every statement
> formulable in the language is truth definite. The law of
> excluded middle holds for every bivalent language. Nobody has
> questioned this. But does the law of excluded middle hold only for
> bivalent languags ? Here there is controversy
> with proponents and opponents.
("DOES THE LAW OF EXCLUDED MIDDLE REQUIRE BIVALENCE?" Erkenntnis
31: 129-137, 1989)
He argues in this paper against the view that a language à la van
Fraassen (with super-evaluations) is able to accept the LEM without
accepting the Bivalence.
I would be happy to hear the opinions and the arguments of FOM
subscribers about the question that Sayward asked in the title of this
paper. Does the LEM require Bivalence?
More information about the FOM