Reference and description: The case against two-dimensionalism (review of Scott Soames' book)
Philosophy Reviews (2005)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links | This entry has no external links. Add one. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBrian Weatherson (2007). Review: Doing Philosophy with Words. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 135 (3):429 - 437.
Quentin Smith (1995). Marcus and the New Theory of Reference: A Reply to Scott Soames. Synthese 104 (2):217 - 244.
Scott Soames (2007). The Substance and Significance of the Dispute Over Two-Dimensionalism. Philosophical Books 48 (1):34-49.
Arthur Sullivan (2006). Reference and Description: The Case Against Two-Dimensionalism. Dialogue 45 (4):792-794.
Robert Michels (2012). Soames's Argument 1 Against Strong Two-Dimensionalism. Philosophical Studies 161 (3):403-420.
Eros Corazza (2005). Review of Scott Soames, Reference and Description: The Case Against Two-Dimensionalism. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2005 (12).
Arthur Sullivan (2006). Reference and Description: The Case Against Two-Dimensionalism Scott Soames Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005, Xii + 359 Pp., $39.50. [REVIEW] Dialogue 45 (04):792-.
Scott Soames (2005). Reference and Description: The Case Against Two-Dimensionalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-08-21Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
