{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.00927357032457496, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.29126213592233, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Inconsistency Theories: The Significance of Semantic Ascent

Among inconsistency theories I distinguish a simple variety that finds an expression to be meaningless when inconsistent, and a complex variety that takes inconsistent expressions to be meaningful. I discuss the associated accounts of concepts and argue that the complex inconsistency theory is incompatible with truth conditional semantics while the simple theory can be applied only to expressions that are mentioned but not used in the theory. I then go on to discuss my own form of simple, metalinguistic theory as applied to the semantic paradoxes and I respond to some objections.