Incommensurability and demarcation
In Dane R. Gordon & Józef Niznik (eds.), Criticism and Defense of Rationality in Contemporary Philosophy. Rodopi (1998)
| Abstract | If the term "relativism" is understood as relativists take it, everyone is a relativist. If, on the other hand, one understands "relativism" as absolutists do, no one really could consistently be a relativist, despite what they might think. As I hope to show, however, much of this positioning of persons and philosophies is foolish. It misses much that is important in philosophical discussion and focuses attention in directions that lead to dead ends. | |||||||||
| Keywords | relativism absolutism incommensurability demarcation | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
  |
| External links |
 Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesH. E. Baber (1987). How Bad Is Rape? Hypatia 2 (2):125 - 138.
P. X. Monaghan (2010). A Novel Interpretation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Metaphysica 11 (1):63-78.
Tang Yijie & Yan Xin (2008). The Contemporary Significance of Confucianism. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 3 (4):477 - 501.
H. M. Malm (1989). Commodification or Compensation: A Reply to Ketchum. Hypatia 4 (3):128 - 135.
Steven D. Hales (1997). A Consistent Relativism. Mind 106 (421):33-52.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
Harold Zellner (1995). “Is Relativism Self-Defeating?”. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:287-295.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-07-21Total downloads27 ( #45,806 of 549,118 )Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #12,390 of 549,118 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
