The nature of shadows, from Yale to bilkent

Philosophy 85 (2):219-223 (2010)
Abstract
I discuss a solution to the Yale shadow puzzle, due to Roy Sorensen, based on the actual process theory of causation, and argue that it does not work in the case of a new version of the puzzle, which I call "the Bilkent shadow puzzle". I offer a picture of the ontology of shadows that constitute the basis for a new solution that uniformly applies to both puzzles.
Keywords shadows  causation  ontology
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 10,133
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
István Aranyosi (2008). Seeing Dark Things. The Philosophy of Shadows. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (3):513-515.
Tom Stoneham (2011). Catching Berkeley's Shadow. Southern Journal of Philosophy 49 (2):116-136.
Roy Sorensen (2006). Spinning Shadows. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (2):345-365.
Roy Sorensen (2006). Spinning Shadows. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 72 (2):345 - 365.
István Aranyosi (2009). The Reappearing Act. Acta Analytica 24 (1):1 - 10.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-09-24

Total downloads

44 ( #34,708 of 1,095,467 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #84,324 of 1,095,467 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.