@article {1217,
	title = {Mstiv{\'a} forma Fitchova paradoxu a jej{\'\i} odm{\'\i}tnut{\'\i} v r{\'a}mci typov{\'a}n{\'\i} znalosti},
	journal = {Organon F},
	volume = {21},
	number = {1},
	year = {2014},
	pages = {138-154},
	type = {State},
	abstract = {Typing knowledge is capable to resolve Fitch{\textquoteright}s knowability paradox. As I have argued elsewhere, Russellian typing knowledge is immune to the recently raised criticism of the typing approach. This paper focuses on a special form of the criticism proposing a revenge problem raised by Williamson, Hart and also Carrara with Fassio. The basic idea of the revenge Fitch{\textquoteright}s paradox employs quantification over type levels. However, the formalism used by the critics is ambivalent. I concentrate only on its two most probable readings, explaining also quantification over types and quantification over orders. As I show in details, if such readings went through, they would violate the typing rules in a direct manner. Hence, there is no revenge for the Russellian typing approach to Fitch{\textquoteright}s knowability paradox.},
	keywords = {Church, Fitch{\textquoteright}s knowability paradox, quantification over types, ramified hierarchy of types, revenge, Russell, Russellian typing knowledge, Tichý},
	url = {http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/organon/prilohy/2014/1/138-154.pdf},
	author = {Raclavsk{\'y}, Ji{\v r}{\'\i}}
}
