Weak and strong directness: Reference and thought
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (3):730-737 (2007)
| 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: 5,701 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesAshley Woodward (2009). The Verwindung of Capital: On the Philosophy and Politics of Gianni Vattimo. Symposium 13 (1):73-99.
Aaron Sloman (1986). Did Searle Attack Strong Strong AI or Weak Strong AI? In Artificial Intelligence and its Applications. Chichester.
Manfred Kraus (2010). Perelman's Interpretation of Reverse Probability Arguments as a Dialectical Mise En Abyme. Philosophy and Rhetoric 43 (4):362-382.
Lieven Decock (2002). Quine's Weak and Strong Indispensability Argument. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (2):231-250.
Jacek Malinowski (1992). Strong Versus Weak Quantum Consequence Operations. Studia Logica 51 (1):113 - 123.
Xiaoping Chen (2011). Various Concepts of “Supervenience” and Their Relations: A Comment on Kim's Theory of Supervenience. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 6 (2):316-333.
Nicholas Shackel (2008). Paradoxes of Probability. In Tamas Rudas (ed.), Handbook of Probability Theory with Applications.
Mark Moyer (2008). Weak and Global Supervenience Are Strong. Philosophical Studies 138 (1):125 - 150.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads15 ( #78,648 of 549,093 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,093 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
