Three conceptions of states of affairs
Noûs 34 (2):237–259 (2000)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesD. M. Armstrong (1997). A World of States of Affairs. Cambridge University Press.
Hans Kraml (1998). States of Affairs. Erkenntnis 48 (2-3):311-324.
Holger Leerhoff (2008). Bradley's Regress, Russell's States of Affairs, and Some General Remarks on the Problem. Studia Philosophica Estonica 1:249-264.
M. Reicher (ed.) (2009). States of Affairs. ontos verlag.
James D. Rissler (2006). Does Armstrong Need States of Affairs? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):193 – 209.
Robert F. Card (2004). Consequentialist Teleology and the Valuation of States of Affairs. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (3):253-265.
Dale Jacquette (2010). Truth Breakers. Topoi 29 (2):153-163.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads84 ( #8,907 of 549,683 )Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #19,337 of 549,683 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
