The Exception Makes the Rule: Reply to Howson
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):213-216 (2009)
| Abstract | Colin Howson argues that (1) my sociologistic reliabilism sheds no light on the objectivity of epistemic content, and that (2) sorites does not threaten the reliability of modus ponens . I reply that argument (1) misrepresents my position, and that argument (2) is beside the point | |||||||||
| Keywords | reliabilism objectivity modus ponens sorites | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesColin Howson (1997). Logic and Probability. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (4):517-531.
Matti Eklund (2006). Schiffer on Vagueness. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (1):12–23.
Joshua Schechter & David Enoch (2006). Meaning and Justification: The Case of Modus Ponens. Noûs 40 (4):687 - 715.
David Enoch (2006). Meaning and Justification: The Case of Modus Ponens. Noûs 40 (4):687 - 715.
Richard DeWitt (1992). Remarks on the Current Status of the Sorites Paradox. Journal of Philosophical Research 17 (1):93.
Colin Howson (2009). Sorites is No Threat to Modus Ponens: A Reply to Kochan. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):209-212.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-07-03Total downloads32 ( #37,825 of 548,972 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
