About this topic
Summary "Anti-theory" is a label often applied to a group of ethical philosophers who, despite substantial disagreements in other areas, possess a shared skepticism towards the aspirations of moral theory.  They share a sense that moral theories--in virtue of trying to reduce all moral considerations to a very small set of general values or principles--cannot do justice to the complexity, particularity or "messiness" of ordinary life.  Insofar as moral theories aim to produce sets of reasons for action which aspire to rational authority over the lives of individual decision-makers, the anti-theorist claims that the moral theory must fail, and they will often (though, not always) point to some absurd or counterintuitive implication of a moral theory in support of that claim.
Key works The anti-theory movement is usually traced to Elizabeth Anscombe's seminal critique of modern moral philosophy in Anscombe 1958.  Following her, Foot 1958 and Winch 1965 offered arguments against the idea of a moral theory as it was then concieved.  Bernard Williams was by far the most influential and dedicated anti-theorist, see Williams 1981, Williams 1985, Smart & Williams 1973, and Williams & Nagel 1976.  Other important contributions to the genre include Wolf 1982, Stocker 1976 and Chapter 1 of MacIntyre 2007.
Introductions Clarke 1987
  Show all references
Related categories
Siblings:
65 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 65
  1. J. E. J. Altham & Ross Harrison (eds.) (1995). World, Mind, and Ethics: Essays on the Ethical Philosophy of Bernard Williams. Cambridge University Press.
    Bernard Williams is one of the most influential figures in recent ethical theory, where he has set a considerable part of the current agenda. In this collection, a distinguished international team of philosophers who have been stimulated by Williams' work give new responses to it. The topics covered include equality, consistency, comparisons between science and ethics, integrity, moral reasons, the moral system, and moral knowledge. Williams himself then provides a substantial reply, which in turn shows both the current directions of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. G. E. M. Anscombe (1958). Modern Moral Philosophy. Philosophy 33 (124):1 - 19.
    The author presents and defends three theses: (1) "the first is that it is not profitable for us at present to do moral philosophy; that should be laid aside at any rate until we have an adequate philosophy of psychology." (2) "the second is that the concepts of obligation, And duty... And of what is morally right and wrong, And of the moral sense of 'ought', Ought to be jettisoned if this is psychologically possible...." (3) "the third thesis is that (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Alfred Archer (2014). Sebastian Schleidgen (Ed.): Should We Act Morally? Essays on Overridingness. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (2):349-350.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jason Brennan (2008). Beyond the Bottom Line: The Theoretical Goals of Moral Theorizing. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 28 (2):277-296.
    Moral theory is no substitute for virtue, but virtue is no substitute for moral theory. Many critics of moral theory, with Richard Posner being one prominent recent example, complain that moral theory is too abstract, that it cannot generally be used to derive particular rights and wrongs, and that it does not improve people's characters. Posner complains that it is thus of no use to legal theorists. This article defends moral theory, and to some degree, philosophical inquiry in general, against (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Keith Burgess-Jackson (1993). The Problem with Contemporary Moral Theory. Hypatia 8 (3):160 - 166.
    Feminists, especially radical feminists, have reason to be dissatisfied with contemporary moral theory, but they are understandably reluctant to abandon the theoretical project until it is seen as unsalvageable. The problem is not, however, as Margaret Urban Walker claims, that theory is abstract, that it seeks to guide conduct, or that it postulates moral knowledge. The problem is that contemporary moral theory is foundational.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Timothy Chappell (2011). Glory as an Ethical Idea. Philosophical Investigations 34 (2):105-134.
    There is a gap between what we think and what we think we think about ethics. This gap appears when elements of our ethical reflection and our moral theories contradict each other. It also appears when something that is important in our ethical reflection is sidelined in our moral theories. The gap appears in both ways with the ethical idea glory. The present exploration of this idea is a case study of how far actual ethical reflection diverges from moral theory. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Timothy Chappell (2009). Ethics Beyond Moral Theory. Philosophical Investigations 32 (3):206-243.
    I develop an anti-theory view of ethics. Moral theory (Kantian, utilitarian, virtue ethical, etc.) is the dominant approach to ethics among academic philosophers. But moral theory's hunt for a single Master Factor (utility, universalisability, virtue . . .) is implausibly systematising and reductionist. Perhaps scientism drives the approach? But good science always insists on respect for the data, even messy data: I criticise Singer's remarks on infanticide as a clear instance of moral theory failing to respect the data of moral (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Timothy Chappell (2007). Integrity and Demandingness. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (3):255 - 265.
    I discuss Bernard Williams’ ‘integrity objection’ – his version of the demandingness objection to unreasonably demanding ‘extremist’ moral theories such as consequentialism – and argue that it is best understood as presupposing the internal reasons thesis. However, since the internal reasons thesis is questionable, so is Williams’ integrity objection. I propose an alternative way of bringing out the unreasonableness of extremism, based on the notion of the agent’s autonomy, and show how an objection to this proposal can be outflanked by (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Stanley G. Clarke (1987). Anti-Theory in Ethics. American Philosophical Quarterly 24 (3):237 - 244.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. David Copp (ed.) (2005). Particularism and Antitheory. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Garrett Cullity (2002). Particularism and Moral Theory: Particularism and Presumptive Reasons: Garrett Cullity. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 76 (1):169–190.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Philippa Foot (1972). Morality as a System of Hypothetical Imperatives. Philosophical Review 81 (3):305-316.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Philippa Foot (1958). Moral Arguments. Mind 67 (268):502-513.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Allan Gibbard (1995). Review: Why Theorize How to Live with Each Other? [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 55 (2):323 - 342.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Lorenzo Greco (2007). Humean Reflections in the Ethics of Bernard Williams. Utilitas 19 (3):312-325.
    In this article I maintain that the anti-theoretical spirit which pervades Williams's ethics is close to the Humean project of developing and defending an ethics based on sentiments which has its main focus in the virtues. In particular, I argue that there are similar underlying themes which run through the philosophies of Hume and Williams, such as the view that a correct ethical perspective cannot avoid dealing with a broader theory of human nature; the conviction that this inquiry cannot be (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. James Griffin (1999). What Can Philosophy Contribute to Ethics?: A Dialogue with Moody-Adams. Utilitas 11 (01):122-.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Nora Hämäläinen (2009). Is Moral Theory Harmful in Practice?—Relocating Anti-Theory in Contemporary Ethics. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (5):539 - 553.
    In this paper I discuss the viability of the claim that at least some forms of moral theory are harmful for sound moral thought and practice. This claim was put forward by e.g. Elisabeth Anscombe ( 1981 ( 1958 )) and by Annette Baier, Peter Winch, D.Z Phillips and Bernard Williams in the 1970’s–1980’s. To this day aspects of it have found resonance in both post-Wittgensteinian and virtue ethical quarters. The criticism has on one hand contributed to a substantial change (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Ulrike Heuer & Gerald Lang (eds.) (2012). Luck, Value, and Commitment: Themes From the Ethics of Bernard Williams. Oxford University Press, USA.
    Luck, Value, and Commitment comprises eleven new essays which engage with, or take their point of departure from, the influential work in moral and political philosophy of Bernard Williams (1929-2003).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Brad Hooker (2012). Theory Vs Anti-Theory. In Ulrika Heuer Gerald Lang (ed.), Luck, Value, and Commitment: Themes from the Moral Philosophy of Bernard Williams. Oxford University Press.
    Bernard Williams influentially attacked ethical theory. This paper assesses arguments for the ‘anti-theory’ position in ethics, including mainly arguments put forward by Williams but also arguments put forward by others. The paper begins by discussing what is supposed to be theory in ethics and what ethical intuitions are taken to be by those involved in the theory versus anti-theory debate. Then the paper responds to the objections that ethical theory is mistaken to prize principles, mistaken to prize rationalism, mistaken to (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Brad Hooker (2012). Theory Versus Anti-Theory in Ethics. In Ulrike Heuer & Gerald Lang (eds.), Luck, Value, and Commitment: Themes From the Ethics of Bernard Williams. Oxford University Press, Usa. 19.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (2009). What Does the Frame Problem Tell Us About Moral Normativity? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (1):25 - 51.
    Within cognitive science, mental processing is often construed as computation over mental representations—i.e., as the manipulation and transformation of mental representations in accordance with rules of the kind expressible in the form of a computer program. This foundational approach has encountered a long-standing, persistently recalcitrant, problem often called the frame problem; it is sometimes called the relevance problem. In this paper we describe the frame problem and certain of its apparent morals concerning human cognition, and we argue that these morals (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. T. H. Irwin (2008). The Threefold Cord: Reconciling Strategies in Moral Theory. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 108 (1part2):121-133.
    Eighteenth-century disputes in moral theory seem to offer an opportunity to scepticism about moral theory and about morality. Twentieth-century theorists have tried to forestall a sceptical argument from disagreement in moral theory to doubts about morality, by appeal to a division between first-order and second-order questions. This division, however, does not answer the sceptical argument. A better reply appears in Butler's treatment of disagreement through his strategies of consensus and comprehension. These strategies are illustrated by his discussion of utilitarianism and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Terence H. Irwin (2000). Ethics as an Inexact Science: Aristotle's Ambitions for Moral Theory'. In Brad Hooker & Margaret Olivia Little (eds.), Moral Particularism. Oxford University Press. 100--29.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Paul Johnston (1999). The Contradictions of Modern Moral Philosophy: Ethics After Wittgenstein. Routledge.
    The Contradictions of Modern Moral Philosophy is a highly original and radical critique of contemporary moral theory. Johnston skillfully demonstrates how much of recent moral philosophy runs aground on the issue of whether we can make correct moral judgements. His analysis begins with an insightful discussion of the divisions within moral philosophy. On one hand many philosophers deny that it is possible to make correct judgements on other peoples actions; on the other, they remain preoccupied with distinguishing between what is (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Leonard Kahn (2011). Conflict, Regret, and Modern Moral Philosophy. In Thom Brooks (ed.), New Waves in Ethics.
    I begin this paper by discussing the difference between outweighing and canceling in conflicts of normativity. I then introduce a thought experiment that I call Crash Drive,and I use it to explain the nature of a certain kind of moral conflict as well as the appropriate emotional response – regret – on the part of the primary agent in this case. Having done this, I turn to a line of criticism opened by Bernard Williams and recently expanded by Jonathan Dancy (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Hugh LaFollette (1997). Pragmatic Ethics. In , Blackwell Guide to Ethical Theory. Blackwell. 400--419.
    Pragmatism is a philosophical movement developed near the turn of the century in the of several prominent American philosophers, most notably, Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and John Dewey. Although many contemporary analytic philosophers never studied American Philosophy in graduate schoo l, analytic philosophy has been significantly shaped by philosophers strongly influenced by that tradition, most especially W. V. Quine, Donald Davidson, Hilary Putnam, and Richard Rorty. Like other philosophical movements, it developed in response to the then-dominant philosophical wisdom. What (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Mark Lance & Margaret Little (2006). Particularism and Antitheory. In David Copp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press. 567--594.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Uri D. Leibowitz (2009). Moral Advice and Moral Theory. Philosophical Studies 146 (3):349 - 359.
    Monists, pluralists, and particularists disagree about the structure of the best explanation of the rightness (wrongness) of actions. In this paper I argue that the availability of good moral advice gives us reason to prefer particularist theories and pluralist theories to monist theories. First, I identify two distinct roles of moral theorizing—explaining the rightness (wrongness) of actions, and providing moral advice—and I explain how these two roles are related. Next, I explain what monists, pluralists, and particularists disagree about. Finally, I (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Brian Leiter (2007). Morality Critics. In Brian Leiter & Michael Rosen (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Continental Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Brian Leiter (1997). Nietzsche and the Morality Critics. Ethics 107 (2):250-285.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Andreas Lind & Johan Brännmark (2008). Particularism in Question: An Interview with Jonathan Dancy. Theoria 74 (1):3-17.
    Jonathan Dancy works within almost all fields of philosophy but is best known as the leading proponent of moral particularism. Particularism challenges “traditional” moral theories, such as Contractualism, Kantianism and Utilitarianism, in that it denies that moral thought and judgement relies upon, or is made possible by, a set of more or less well-defined, hierarchical principles. During the summer of 2006, the Philosophy Departments of Lund University (Sweden) and the University of Reading (England) began a series of exchanges to take (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Alex John London (2001). The Independence of Practical Ethics. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (2):87-105.
    After criticizing three common conceptions of therelationship between practical ethics and ethical theory, analternative modeled on Aristotle's conception of the relationshipbetween rhetoric and philosophical ethics is explored. Thisaccount is unique in that it neither denigrates the project ofsearching for an adequate comprehensive ethical theory norsubordinates practical ethics to that project. Because the purpose of practical ethics, on this view, is tosecure the cooperation of other persons in a way that respectstheir status as free and equal, it seeks to influence thejudgments (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Robert B. Louden (1992). Morality and Moral Theory: A Reappraisal and Reaffirmation. Oxford University Press.
    Contemporary philosophers have grown increasingly skeptical toward both morality and moral theory. Some argue that moral theory is a radically misguided enterprise that does not illuminate moral practice, while others simply deny the value of morality in human life. In this important new book, Louden responds to the arguments of both "anti-morality" and "anti-theory" skeptics. In Part One, he develops and defends an alternative conception of morality, which, he argues, captures more of the central features of both Aristotelian and Kantian (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Robert B. Louden (1990). Virtue Ethics and Anti-Theory. Philosophia 20 (1-2):93-114.
  35. Alasdair Macintyre (1990). Moral Dilemmas. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 50:367-382.
    Against theses of Bernard Williams and Bas C. van Fraassen, it is argued that there are no facts about moral dilemmas, characterizable independently of any moral theory. It is further argued that any adequate theory which denies that there are genuine moral dilemmas must provide a convincing account of how and why moral agents take themselves to be in dilemmatic situations. The ability of rationalist theories, which deny that genuine moral dilemmas occur, to provide such account is examined. Aquinas's contribution (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Elinor Mason (1999). Do Consequentialists Have One Thought Too Many? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 2 (3):243-261.
    In this paper I defend consequentialism against the objection that consequentialists are alienated from their personal relationships through having inappropriate motivational states. This objection is one interpretation of Williams' claim that consequentialists will have "one thought too many". Consequentialists should cultivate dispositions to act from their concern for others. I argue that having such a disposition is consistent with a belief in consequentialism and constitutes an appropriate attitude to personal relationships. If the consequentialist has stable beliefs that friendship is justifiable (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Michele M. Moody-Adams (1999). Griffin's Modest Proposal. Utilitas 11 (01):112-.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Martha Nussbaum (2000). Why Practice Needs Ethical Theory: Particularism, Principle, and Bad Behavior. In Brad Hooker & Margaret Olivia Little (eds.), Moral Particularism. Oxford University Press. 227--55.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Roger Paden (1992). Anti-Theory in Ethics and Moral Conservatism. Review of Metaphysics 46 (1):148-149.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Michael Philips (1987). Moralism and the Good. Philosophical Studies 52 (1):131 - 139.
    It is often held that moral considerations take precedence over considerations of other kinds in determining what we ought to do. I contend that this claim is ambiguous and argue that objections to each interpretation of it can be met only by rejecting the other. One surprising consequence of my argument is that no deontic moral theory can effectively guide action unless it is conjoined with a theory of the good. Another interesting consequence is that the deontologists' favorite objection to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Adrian M. S. Piper (1987). Moral Theory and Moral Alienation. Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):102-118.
    Contemporary Debates in Moral Theory features pairs of newly commissioned essays by some of the leading theorists working in the field today. Brings together fresh debates on the most controversial issues in moral theory Questions include: Are moral requirements derived from reason? How demanding is morality? Are virtues the proper starting point for moral theorizing? Lively debate format sharply defines the issues, and paves the way for further discussion. Will serve as an accessible introduction to the major topics in contemporary (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Boris Rähme & Valentina Chizzola (2011). Contingenza o Validità Universale? Rorty E Apel Sul Progresso Morale. Annali di Studi Religiosi 12:171-183.
    This paper examines two contemporary answers to the question of whether moral values and norms are apt for rational criticism and justification: Richard Rorty’s radically contextualist approach—which is centered around the notion of contingency and is characterized by a dismissal of all claims to philosophical justification—and Karl-Otto Apel’s transcendental-pragmatic version of discourse ethics—which encompasses highly ambitious claims to justification and universal validity. Contrasting the key theses of Rorty’s contextualism with those of Apel’s universalist discourse ethics and reconstructing their respective conceptions (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Peter Railton (1984). Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
    The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Lisa Rivera (2010). Worthy Lives. Social Theory and Practice 32 (2):185-212.
    Susan Wolf's paper "Meaning and Morality" draws our attention to the fact that Williams's objection to Kantian morality is primarily a concern about a possible conflict between morality and that which gives our lives meaning. I argue that the force of Williams's objection requires a more precise understanding of meaning as dependent on our intention to make our lives themselves worthwhile. It is not meaning simpliciter that makes Williams's objective persuasive but rather meaning as arising out of our positive evaluation (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Lisa Rivera (2007). Sacrifices, Aspirations and Morality: Williams Reconsidered. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (1):69 - 87.
    When a person gives up an end of crucial importance to her in order to promote a moral aim, we regard her as having made a moral sacrifice. The paper analyzes these sacrifices in light of some of Bernard Williams’ objections to Kantian and Utilitarian accounts of them. Williams argues that an implausible consequence of these theories is that that we are expected to sacrifice projects that make our lives worth living and contribute to our integrity. Williams’ arguments about integrity (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. John D. Schaeffer (1990). Anti-Theory in Ethics and Moral Conservatism. New Vico Studies 8:135-137.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Mark Schroeder (2009). Review: A Matter of Principle. [REVIEW] Noûs 43 (3):568 - 580.
    This article is a joint critical notice of Sean McKeever and Michael Ridge's book Principled Ethics and Jonathan Dancy's book Ethics Without Principles.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (1999). Some Varieties of Particularism. Metaphilosophy 30 (1&2):1-12.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Michael Slote (2010). Moral Sentimentalism. Oxford University Press.
    There has recently been a good deal of interest in moral sentimentalism, but most of that interest has been exclusively either in metaethical questions about the meaning of moral terms or in normative issues about benevolence and/or caring and their place in morality. In Moral Sentimentalism Michael Slote attempts to deal with both sorts of issues and to do so, primarily, in terms of the notion or phenomenon of empathy. Hume sought to do something like this over two centuries ago, (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. David Sobel (2007). The Impotence of the Demandingness Objection. Philosophers' Imprint 7 (8):1-17.
    Consequentialism, many philosophers have claimed, asks too much of us to be a plausible ethical theory. Indeed, the theory's severe demandingness is often claimed to be its chief flaw. My thesis is that as we come to better understand this objection, we see that, even if it signals or tracks the existence of a real problem for Consequentialism, it cannot itself be a fundamental problem with the view. The objection cannot itself provide good reason to break with Consequentialism, because it (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 65