In recent years, substructural approaches to paradoxes have become quite popular. But whatever restrictions on structural rules we may want to enforce, it is highly desirable that such restrictions be accompanied by independent philosophical motivation, not directly related to paradoxes. Indeed, while these recent developments have shed new light on a number of issues pertaining to paradoxes, it seems that we now have even more open questions than before, in particular two very pressing ones: what (independent) motivations do we have (if any) for restrictions on structural rules, and what to make of the plurality of new logics emerging from these restrictions, i.e. how to ‘choose’ among the different options. In this paper, we address these two questions from the perspective of a dialogical conception of logic that we've been advocating in recent years. We will argue that dialogical interpretations of structural rules, that is, as rules determining specific properties of the dialogues in question, provide a conveniently neutral framework to adjudicate between the different substructural proposals that have been made in the literature on paradoxes.

中文翻译：

---

对话视角下的悖论和结构规则

近年来，悖论的子结构方法变得非常流行。但是，无论我们想对结构性规则实施何种限制，都非常希望这种限制伴随着独立的哲学动机，而不是与悖论直接相关。的确，虽然最近的这些发展对许多与悖论有关的问题有了新的认识，但似乎我们现在比以前有更多的开放性问题，尤其是两个非常紧迫的问题：我们有什么（独立的）动机（如果有的话） ) 对结构规则的限制，以及如何利用这些限制产生的多种新逻辑，即如何在不同的选项中“选择”。在本文中，我们从逻辑的对话概念的角度来解决这两个问题。近年来一直提倡。我们将论证结构规则的对话解释，即作为确定所讨论对话的特定属性的规则，提供了一个方便的中立框架，以在关于悖论的文献中提出的不同子结构建议之间进行裁决。