Further remarks on property designators and rigidity (reply to lópez de sa's criticisms)

Grazer Philosophische Studien 76 (1):199-208 (2008)
Abstract
Are all canonical property designators (i.e. nominalizations of predicative phrases) rigid? Dan López de Sa recently criticized the arguments I gave for an affirmative answer to that question. The current article rebuts López de Sa's objections.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,360
External links
  • Through your library Configure
    References found in this work BETA

    No references found.

    Citations of this work BETA

    No citations found.

    Similar books and articles
    Mark C. Murphy (2004). Reply to Almeida. Religious Studies 40 (3):335-339.
    Joseph LaPorte (2006). Rigid Designators for Properties. Philosophical Studies 130 (2):321 - 336.
    Dan López de Sa (2007). Rigidity, General Terms, and Trivialization. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 107 (1pt1):117-123.
    Benjamin Schnieder (2006). Canonical Property Designators. American Philosophical Quarterly 43 (2):119 - 132.
    Berit Brogaard (2007). A Puzzle About Properties. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (3):635-650.
    Dan López de Sa (2006). Flexible Property Designators. Grazer Philosophische Studien 73 (1):221-230.
    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2009-01-28

    Total downloads

    12 ( #106,462 of 1,089,156 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #69,735 of 1,089,156 )

    How can I increase my downloads?

    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.