[FOM] intuitionism and the liar paradox

Nik Weaver nweaver at math.wustl.edu
Wed Apr 14 20:19:35 EDT 2010

Almost a year ago I posted a paper in which I claimed to have resolved
the liar paradox.  Since the reaction suggested that readers found it
hard to understand, I've written what I hope is a more accessible version,
with technicalities omitted but the essential philosophical point laid out
in more detail.  It's called "Intuitionism and the liar paradox" and is
available at


(The earlier paper, "Constructive truth and circularity" is there as well.)

The most common criticism of the earlier paper was that the circularity I
identify in ex falso and "A is true implies A" is no worse than similar,
or possibly identical, circularities in other deduction rules.  I don't
think that's right, and I tried to lay out why not very clearly in the new

Nik Weaver
Math Dept.
Washington University
St. Louis, MO 63103 USA
nweaver at math.wustl.edu

More information about the FOM mailing list