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.

Against Schmought

Prioritized Norms in Formal Argumentation

Defining Normativity

Towards a semantics for metanormative constructivism

Norms on Categories and Analogs of the Schröder-Bernstein Theorem

Two asymmetries in population and general normative ethics

A blueprint of the Entrenchment-and- Conventionalization Model

Metanormative theory and the meaning of deontic modals

Two Improvements to the Intentional Stance Theory: Hutto and Satne on Naturalizing Content

Ethics and morality, principles and practice

Normative Impulsivity: Adorno on Ethics and the Body

Is there a duality in the classical acceptance of non-constructive, foundational, concepts as axiomatic?

Agency’s Constitutive Normativity: An Elucidation

Higher-Level Paradoxes and Substructural Solutions

The Quest for Purity : Another Look at the New Wittgenstein

Why Be an Agent?

Moral dumbfounding and imaginative resistance

The Effect of Preferences in Abstract Argumentation under a Claim-Centric View

How Is MaterialA Priori:A Discussion Based on Max Scheler's Non-Formal Ethics of Values

I, VOLKSWAGEN

A Paraconsistent Multi-agent Framework for Dealing with Normative Conflicts