Reid's critique of Berkeley and Hume: What's the big idea?
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 55 (2):279-296 (1995)
| 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: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesCharles J. McCracken & I. C. Tipton (eds.) (2000). Berkeley's Principles and Dialogues: Background Source Materials. Cambridge University Press.
Todd Ganson (1999). Berkeley, Reid, and Thomas Brown on the Origins of Our Spatial Concepts. Reid Studies 3 (1):49-62.
Stewart Duncan (2009). Hume and a Worry About Simplicity. History of Philosophy Quarterly 26 (2):139-157.
Amit Hagar (2002). Thomas Reid and Non-Euclidean Geometry. Reid Studies 5 (2):54-64.
Keith DeRose (2005). Direct Warrant Realism. In Andrew Dole & Andrew Chignell (eds.), God and the Ethics of Belief: New Essays in Philosophy of Religion. Cambridge University Press.
Albert Casullo (1979). Reid and Mill on Hume's Maxim of Conceivability. Analysis 39 (4):212--219.
Donald L. M. Baxter (1997). Abstraction, Inseparability, and Identity. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (2):307-330.
Michael S. Pritchard (2008). Justice And Resentment In Hume, Reid, And Smith. Journal of Scottish Philosophy 6 (1):59-70.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads35 ( #34,083 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,729 of 548,984 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
