On dr. Ewing's neglect of Bradley's theory of internal relations: Reply
Journal of Philosophy 32 (10):273 (1935)
| 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: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesD. H. J. Warner & A. C. Ewing (1965). Reply to First and Second Thoughts in Moral Philosophy. Mind 74 (296):598.
Daniel von Wachter (1998). On Doing Without Relations. Erkenntnis 48 (2/3):355-358.
Richard Parker (1984). Bradley's Paradox and Russell's Theory of Relations. Philosophy Research Archives 10:261-273.
John Knox Jr (1975). A. C. Ewing: A Critical Survey of Ewing's Recent Work. Religious Studies 11 (2):229 - 255.
Jonas Olson (2009). Fitting Attitude Analyses of Value and the Partiality Challenge. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (4):365 - 378.
F. H. Bradley (1963). The Principles of Logic. [London]Oxford University Press.
F. Bradley (1914). Essays on Truth and Reality. Clarendon Press.
Ralph W. Church (1935). On Dr. Ewing's Neglect of Bradley's Theory of Internal Relations. Journal of Philosophy 32 (10):264-273.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads7 ( #134,900 of 556,803 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
