Paul Saka: to hell with the theory of truth

In his outstandingly clear and convincingly argued paper "Beyond truth", Paul Saka ends with a passage that attempts to give the final stab to truth-conditional semantics:

"It is unlikely for any expert semanticist in either linguistics or philosophy not to have heard of the liar paradox, and not to know that it seems to prove that the theory of truth is illegitimate; most use the theory of truth in the foundations of their research, and yet practically none at all even acknowledge the inconsistency of their position. It is nothing less than scandalous."

Paul Saka: fierce theory of truth buster

Our established practice of science (and by extension, the teaching programs that help propagate it) does not come out unscathed either:

"It also proves, in case an object lesson were needed, that research programs do not rise and fall according to intellectual merit alone. When a theory is logically refutable, and everyone knows it, yet the theory enjoys orthodoxy nonetheless, then obviously non-rational forces are at work, be they sociological or psychological."

I'll definitely read more of Paul Saka.

Update: maybe I should have used quotation marks in the title of this post, as it now seems as though I want to say something to Paul Saka, namely: "To hell with [your] theory of truth". That's most definitely not what I meant, as it's Saka himself who is highly dismissive of this theory. I didn't use quote marks for the simple reason that he didn't use these actual words. Incidentally, Paul Saka has written extensively on quotation, e.g. this paper.