Course Information
Course title
 Independent Study: Classical Approaches to the Liar Paradox 
Semester
 109-1 
Designated for
 COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS  GRADUATE INSTITUTE OF PHILOSOPHY  
Instructor
 Duen-Min Deng 
Curriculum Number
 Phl7880 
Curriculum Identity Number
 124 M6090 
Class
  
Credits
 1.0 
Full/Half
Yr.
 Half 
Required/
Elective
 Elective 
Time
 Friday 1(8:10~9:00) 
Remarks
 Restriction: MA students and beyond AND Restriction: within this department (including students taking minor and dual degree program)
The upper limit of the number of students: 3. 
  
Course introduction video
 
Table of Core Capabilities and Curriculum Planning
 Table of Core Capabilities and Curriculum Planning
Course Syllabus
Please respect the intellectual property rights of others and do not copy any of the course information without permission
Course Description

Approaches to the study of the Liar Paradox are abundant in the philosophical literature. For this independent study we will be focused on those based on Classical Logic, including Maudlin 2004, the dual theories Field mentions in Field 2008, contextualist approaches in Glanzberg 2004, the revision theories of truth in Herzberger 1982, Gupta 1982 and Gupta and Belnap 1993. We will also study Scharp’s idea that we should simply replace the notion of truth with something else. 

Course Objective
 To help students to have a firm grasp of Classical Approaches to the liar paradox in order to become better prepared for future studies into the subject. 
Course Requirement
 Read weekly assignments, finish short essays, and participate in discussion.  
Student Workload (expected study time outside of class per week)
  
Office Hours
  
References
 Field, Hartry, 2008, Saving Truth from Paradox, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Glanzberg, Michael, 2004a, “A contextual-hierarchical approach to truth and the Liar paradox”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 33(1): 27–88.
Gupta, Anil, 1982, “Truth and paradox”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 11(1): 1–60.
Gupta, Anil and Nuel Belnap, 1993, The Revision Theory of Truth, Cambridge: MIT Press.
Herzberger, Hans G., 1982, “Notes on naive semantics”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 11(1): 61–102.
Kripke, Saul, 1975, “Outline of a theory of truth”, Journal of Philosophy, 72(19): 690–716.
Martin, Robert L. (ed.), 1984, Recent Essays on Truth and the Liar Paradox, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Maudlin, Tim, 2004, Truth and Paradox, Oxford University Press.
Priest, Graham, 2008, An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, second edition.
Scharp, Kevin, 2013, Replacing Truth, Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Designated reading
 待補 
Grading
  
No.
Item
%
Explanations for the conditions
1. 
 Participation 
40% 
  
2. 
 Presentation  
60% 
  
 
Progress
Week
Date
Topic
Week 1
 9/18  Introduction 
Week 2
 9/25  Herzberger, “Notes on naive semantics” 
Week 3
 10/02  Gupta, “Truth and paradox” 
Week 4
 10/09  Gupta and Belnap, 1993, The Revision Theory of Truth, Chapters 1, 4 and 7 
Week 5
 10/16  Gupta and Belnap, 1993, The Revision Theory of Truth, Chapters 2 and 3 
Week 6
 10/23  Gupta and Belnap, 1993, The Revision Theory of Truth, Chapters 5 and 6 
Week 7
 10/30  Field, Saving Truth from Paradox, Chapters 6, 7 and 8 
Week 8
 11/06  Field, Saving Truth from Paradox, Chapters 9, 10 and 11 
Week 9
 11/13  Midterm week 
Week 10
 11/20  Field, Saving Truth from Paradox, Chapters 12, 13 and 14 
Week 11
 11/27  Glanzberg, “A contextual-hierarchical approach to truth and the Liar paradox” 
Week 12
 12/04  Maudlin, Tim, 2004, Truth and Paradox, Chapter 2 
Week 13
 12/11  Maudlin, Tim, 2004, Truth and Paradox, Chapters 3 and 4 
Week 14
 12/18  Scharp, Replacing Truth, Introduction and Chapters 1, 2 and 3 
Week 15
 12/25  Scharp, Replacing Truth, Chapters 4 and 5 
Week 16
 1/01  Scharp, Replacing Truth, Chapters 6, 7 and 8 
Week 17
 1/08  Scharp, Replacing Truth, Chapters 9, 10 and Conclusion 
Week 18
 1/15  Final paper