• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.87-124
• /
• 2019

A dialetheic approach to the sorites paradox is to understand a borderline case as a true contradiction. In order to accommodate this approach, the possibility of an alternative that does not involve a contradiction should be considered first. Beall presents an alternative that has all virtues of dialetheic solution without contradiction. I do not think his alternative has no contradiction. Using the inclosure schema I will show it. Furthermore, I will show that all alternatives which do not accept the existence of cut-off point imply a contradiction. This means that we have to accept a true contradiction as long as we accept the intuition of vagueness, especially, what is called 'tolerance'.