Question

I ead subvaluationists think that P can be both true and false (unlike supervaluationists, who think that P is neither true nor false), but it's completely unclear (because I can't read symbolic logic and haven't found an introduction) whether they - or indeed anyone else - claim that borderline cases are both P and not P.

Answer 1

Subvaluationists believe that P can be both true and false, but it is unclear whether they claim that borderline cases are both P and not P.

Step-by-step explanation:

The question is asking about the belief held by subvaluationists regarding the truth value of proposition P. Subvaluationists believe that P can be both true and false, while supervaluationists claim that P is neither true nor false. However, it is not clear whether subvaluationists or anyone else claims that borderline cases are both P and not P.

It is important to note that in logic, a proposition cannot have contradictory truth values. It can either be true or false, but not both. The concept of borderline cases having contradictory truth values is not a widely accepted view in logical reasoning.

Therefore, it is unclear whether subvaluationists or any other group of philosophers claim that borderline cases can have both truth values. Further research on the specific ideas and claims of subvaluationists would be necessary to provide a more definitive answer.