Incommensurability and the "omission" in Gibson's theory: A second reply to Heil
Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 12 (3):345–347 (1982)
| 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: 5,865 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJohn McDowell (1996). Reply to Gibson, Byrne, and Brandom. Philosophical Issues 7:283-300.
Howard Sankey (1998). Taxonomic Incommensurability. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (1):7 – 16.
Vera Hoffmann (2006). Can Heil's Ontological Conception Accommodate Complex Properties? In Michael Esfeld (ed.), John Heil. Symposium on his Ontological Point of View. ontos verlag.
Edward S. Reed & Rebecca K. Jones (1982). Perception and Cognition: A Final Reply to Heil. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 12 (2):223–224.
Christopher J. Anderson (2005). Alternative Perspectives on Omission Bias. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):544-544.
John Heil (1979). What Gibson's Missing. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 9 (3):265–269.
John Heil (1981). Gibsonian Sins of Omission. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 11 (3):307–311.
Stephen Wilcox & Stuart Katz (1981). What Gibson Isn't Missing After All: A Reply to Heil. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 11 (3):313–317.
Harry Heft (1980). What Heil is Missing in Gibson: A Reply. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 10 (3):187–193.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads3 ( #203,740 of 556,773 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
