Abstract
Weber, Colyvan, and Priest have advanced glutty (dialetheic) approaches to the sorites, on which the truth about the penumbral region of a soritical series is inconsistent. The major benefit of a glut-based approach is maintaining the truth of all sorites premisses while none the less avoiding, in a principled fashion, the absurdity of the sorites conclusion(s). I agree that this is a major virtue of the target glutty approach; however, I think that it can be had without gluts. If correct, this result weighs heavily against the proposed glutty approach, at least given the default-consistency principle that all target glutty philosophers accept: posit gluts only if there is no consistent theory that enjoys the same virtues as the would-be glutty solution.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 791-811 |
Number of pages | 21 |
Journal | Mind |
Volume | 123 |
Issue number | 491 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Jul 2014 |