We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Degree-theoretical approaches to vagueness attempt to flesh out the idea that properties referred to by vague predicates come in degrees, and that sentences containing such predicates can be true to a degree in between absolute truth and absolute falsity. This many-valued semantics is wedded either to some fuzzy logic, or to a non-truth-functional logic, or even to classical logic. The first part of the chapter is devoted to surveying these different alternatives. Subsequently, we discuss the standard fuzzy approach (SFA) to the Sorites, based on infinite-valued Łukasiewicz logic. The mainstream objections to the SFA are then dispelled from a perspective that views classical logic as an ambiguous logic. Next, we address the status of the Tolerance principle in the SFA. We provide a semantics for vague predicates within Rational Pavelka Logic (RPL), contending that the conditional premisses in a Sorites are ambiguous between a reading as Łukasiewicz conditionals and a reading as 'tolerance conditionals'. In conclusion, we formalise in RPL a purely structural version of the paradox, where no logical constant is involved. We ascribe this paradox to an equivocation over consequence.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.