|Abstract||Philosophers have a way of making the obvious seem absurd, the pervasive seem problematic, and the actual seem impossible. They deny, or at least raise grave doubts about or else render paradoxical, such things as causality and change, consciousness and free will, and knowledge of material objects. They use smoke and mirrors, I mean powerful arguments, to do this. Take the case of singular thought.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
David B. Martens (1993). Close Enough to Reference. Synthese 95 (3):357 - 377.
Manuel de Pinedo (2004). Truth Matters: Normativity in Thought and Knowledge. Theoria 19 (2):137-154.
J. William Forgie (2008). Kant and Existence: Critique of Pure Reason a 600/B 628. Kant-Studien 99 (1):1-12.
Gong Hua'nan & Liu Liangjian (2008). How Is the Arrival of Things Possible? — On Things and Their Arrival in Ancient Chinese Thought. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (3):389 - 408.
Peter Carruthers (2006). Conscious Experience Versus Conscious Thought. In Uriah Kriegel & Kenneth Williford (eds.), Consciousness and Self-Reference. MIT Press.
Andre Gallois, Identity Over Time. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Kenneth A. Taylor (forthcoming). On Singularity. In Robin Jeshion (ed.), New Essays on Singular Thought. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #32,645 of 722,831 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,645 of 722,831 )
How can I increase my downloads?