Noûs 40 (4):687 - 715 (2006)
|Abstract||In virtue of what are we justified in employing the rule of inference Modus Ponens? One tempting approach to answering this question is to claim that we are justified in employing Modus Ponens purely in virtue of facts concerning meaning or concept-possession. In this paper, we argue that such meaning-based accounts cannot be accepted as the fundamental account of our justification.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Huajie Liu (2006). Instability, Modus Ponens and Uncertainty of Deduction. Frontiers of Philosophy in China 1 (4):658-674.
Jordan Howard Sobel, Hosiasson-Lindenbaum/Kolmogorov Probability Theory: Solutions to Exercises in Appendix a of Extended Version of “Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens ….
Jeff Kochan (2009). The Exception Makes the Rule: Reply to Howson. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):213-216.
Susanne Bobzien (2002). The Development of Modus Ponens in Antiquity : From Aristotle to the 2nd Century AD. Phronesis 47 (4):359-394.
Niki Pfeifer & G. D. Kleiter (2007). Human Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities: Modus Ponens and Denying the Antecedent. In Proceedings of the 5 T H International Symposium on Imprecise Probability: Theories and Applications.
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.
David Enoch (2006). Meaning and Justification: The Case of Modus Ponens. Noûs 40 (4):687 - 715.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads101 ( #6,020 of 549,066 )
Recent downloads (6 months)9 ( #7,720 of 549,066 )
How can I increase my downloads?