The Generalisation Argument: A Reply to Mr. Braybrooke
Analysis 23 (5):113 - 115 (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: 5,875 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesGillian Brock (1994). Braybrooke on Needs. Ethics 104 (4):811-823.
R. I. Damper (1998). Parity Still Isn't a Generalisation Problem. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):307-308.
Alvin I. Goldman (1976). Reply to Braybrooke. Philosophical Studies 30 (4):273 - 275.
Charles Taylor (1994). Reply to Braybrooke and de Sousa. Dialogue 33 (01):125-.
David Braybrooke (1982). Inequalities Not Conceded Yet: A Rejoinder to Gauthier's Reply. Dialogue 21 (03):445-448.
David Braybrooke (1998). Justice in Jeopardy If Needs Not Met: A Reply to Gillian Brock. Dialogue 37 (04):799-.
David Braybrooke (1971). Three Separable Tests: Reply to Professors Ginsberg and Margolis. World Futures 9 (1):140-147.
Gillian Brock (1996). Justice and Needs. Dialogue 35 (01):81-.
Simon Farrell & Stephan Lewandowsky (2000). The Case Against Distributed Representations: Lack of Evidence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):476-477.
E. J. Coffman (2011). How (Not) to Attack the Luck Argument. Philosophical Explorations 13 (2):157-166.
David Braybrooke (2003). What Truth Does the Emotive-Imperative Answer to the Open-Question Argument Leave to Moral Judgments? Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (3):341-352.
Duncan MacIntosh (2007). The Mutual Limitation of Needs as Bases of Moral Entitlements: A Solution to Braybrooke's Problem. In Susan Sherwin & Peter Schotch (eds.), Engaged Philosophy: Essays in Honour of David Braybrooke. University of Toronto Press.
Nancy Salay (2008). Thinking Without Global Generalisations: A Cognitive Defence of Moral Particularism. Inquiry 51 (4):390 – 411.
Daniel Haas (2013). In Defense of Hard-Line Replies to the Multiple-Case Manipulation Argument. Philosophical Studies 163 (3):797-811.
Hans Halvorson & Rob Clifton (2002). Reconsidering Bohr's Reply to EPR. In T. Placek & J. Butterfield (eds.), Non-locality and Modality. Kluwer.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2011-05-29Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
