In this paper I consider attempts to unify the liar and sorites paradoxes. I argue that while they both may be said to exhibit indeterminacy and be alike in this respect, attempts to model the indeterminacy by way of a paracomplete logic result in the two paradoxes diverging in their logical structure in the face of extended paradoxes. If, on the other hand, a paraconsistent logic is invoked then the paradoxes and associated extended paradoxes may be seen to be of a kind in having their source in the indeterminacy of the relevant predicates involved. Paraconsistency then offers the prospect of a unified treatment of these vexing puzzles.