On letters and law reviews: A jaded rejoinder

Abstract

I've been asked to comment upon Professor Jensen's essay, and I'm left with wearily wondering why's. Why did Jensen write this piece in the first place? Why was I asked to address it? Why did I so quickly say yes?Let me respond.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

My notes

Similar books and articles

The disappearing media ethics debate in letters to the editor.Brian Thornton - 1998 - Journal of Mass Media Ethics 13 (1):40 – 55.
Letters to the Editor.Kenneth R. Whittemore & Joseph C. Good - 1995 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 23 (3):299-299.
Letters. Johannes, John of John of Salisbury & Christopher Brooke - 1955 - New York,: T. Nelson. Edited by W. J. Millor, Harold Edgeworth Butler & Christopher Brooke.
The causal efficacy of mental states.Peter Menzies - 2003 - In Sven Walter & Heinz-Dieter Heckmann (eds.), Physicalism and Mental Causation. Imprint Academic. pp. 195--223.
Comment upon Professor Henze's Rejoinder.C. A. Campbell - 1961 - Analysis 22 (6):145 - 147.
A Rejoinder to the Danapur Rejoinder.Raymond Wilson - 1984 - British Journal of Educational Studies 32 (1):55 - 57.
Well temper'd eloquence.David Hume - 1996 - Edinburgh: The David Hume Institute. Edited by David Hume & Ingrid A. Merikoski.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
2 (#1,787,337)

6 months
1 (#1,516,429)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references