A criticism of Lovejoy's case for epistemological dualism
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 23 (4):527-537 (1963)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesCharles Taliaferro (1995). Animals, Brains, and Spirits. Faith and Philosophy 12 (4):567-581.
William Lycan (2009). Giving Dualism its Due. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (4):551-563.
Leonard J. Clapp (1997). Senses, Sensations and Brain Processes: A Criticism of the Property Dualism Argument. Southwest Philosophy Review 14 (1):139-148.
Roy Wood Sellars (1921). Epistemological Dualism Vs. Metaphysical Dualism. Philosophical Review 30 (5):482-493.
John Beloff (1989). Dualism: A Parapsychological Perspective. In J. Smythies & John Beloff (eds.), The Case for Dualism. Virginia University Press.
Arthur O. Lovejoy (1933). Dualism and the Paradox of Reference. Journal of Philosophy 30 (22):589-606.
Howard D. Roelofs (1955). A Case for Dualism and Interactionism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 15 (June):451-76.
John A. Foster (1989). A Defense of Dualism. In J. Smythies & John Beloff (eds.), The Case for Dualism. University of Virginia Press.
Arthur O. Lovejoy (1960). The Revolt Against Dualism: An Inquiry Concerning the Existence of Ideas. La Salle, Ill.,Open Court Pub. Co..
Robert A. Oakes (1973). Some Perspectives on Lovejoy's Epistemological Dualism. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 9 (2):116 - 123.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads1 ( #274,507 of 548,941 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
