  According to such a theory \(\mathcal{T}\), sentences \(\lambda\) and \(\lnot\lambda\) can be intersubstitutable, as long as both  \(\vdash _{\mathcal{T}} \lambda\) and \(\vdash _{\mathcal{T}} \lnot \lambda\). Such theories are “glutty”, in the sense that they affirm  some sentence together with its negation (see entry on  dialetheism).  Yet a number of prominent paraconsistent logics can’t serve as the basis for Curry-complete theories on pain of triviality. Such logics are sometimes said to fail to be “Curry  paraconsistent” (Slaney  1989).[21] 