Abstract:There have been recent arguments against the idea that substructural solutions are uniform. The claim is that even if the substructuralist solves the common semantic paradoxes uniformly by targeting Cut or Contraction, with additional machinery, we can construct higher-level paradoxes (e.g., a higher-level Liar, a higher-level Curry, and a meta-validity Curry). These higher-level paradoxes do not use metainferential Cut or Contraction, but rather, higher-level Cuts and higher-level Contractions. These kinds of paradoxes suggest that targeting Cut or Contraction is not enough for solving semantic paradoxes; the substructuralist must target Cut of every level or Contraction of every level to solve the paradoxes. Hence, the substructuralists do not provide as uniform of a solution as they hoped they did. In response, we argue that the substructuralists need not admit these additional machineries. In fact, they are redundant in light of the validity predicate (i.e., there is no gain in terms of expressive power). The validity predicate is powerful enough to creep these paradoxes in the object level. The substructuralist does not need to ascend to metainferences to construct higher-level paradoxes. Moreover, there is a reading available to the substructuralist such that all the higher-level structural rules would collapse to instances of the object-level structural rules (e.g., meta Cut and meta Contraction would become instances of Cut and Contraction). We then address Barrio et al.'s worry that the validity predicate has its shortcomings; the substructuralist cannot internalize some of its metarules. We claim that the validity of metarules can be internalized without the need to strengthen the validity predicate. However, a problem raised by Barrio et al. is still present—the problem of internalizing unwanted instances of Cut in Cut-free approaches. We argue that this internalization problem is not unique to the validity predicate; the same problem is present with other problematic predicates, such as the truth predicate and the provability predicate.

Sometime a Paradox, Now Proof: Non-First-Order-izability of Yablo's Paradox

Theoremizing Yablo's Paradox

Yablo's Paradox And Arithmetical Incompleteness

Avoiding Contradictions in the Paradoxes, the Halting Problem, and Diagonalization

Resolving Bertrand's Probability Paradox

Wittgenstein, Peirce, and paradoxes of mathematical proof

Logic and Paradox

Beware of the Gödel- Wette paradox

Some paradoxes of Infinity revisited

Paradox regained: Life beyond Goedel's shadow

Higher-Level Paradoxes and Substructural Solutions

On Semantic Paradoxes from the Perspective of Substructural Logics

Paradoxes of Definability, Russell’s Paradox, the Liar

Some Infinitary Paradoxes and Undecidable Sentences in Peano Arithmetic

Turing Machine Halting Problem, Russell’s Paradox and Gödel Incompleteness Theorem

Tableaux for logic of paradox

Russell’s Paradox and Free Zig Zag Solutions

On logic of paradox

A genuinely untyped solution to the knower paradoxes

Bochvar's three-valued logic and literal paralogics: Their lattice and functional equivalence

The Language Structure of Paradox:Recursive Negation