Addenda to the third man argument: A reply to professor Sellars
Philosophical Review 64 (3):438-448 (1955)
| 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: 5,705 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesGregory Vlastos (1994). Socratic Studies. Cambridge University Press.
Ausonio Marras (1976). Sellars' Behaviourism: A Reply to Fred Wilson. Philosophical Studies 30 (December):413-418.
James C. Dybikowski (1972). Professor Owen, Aristotle, and the Third Man Argument. Mind 81 (323):445-447.
Sid Thomas (1962). Professor Sellars on Meaning and Aboutness. Philosophical Studies 13 (5):68-74.
Gregory Vlastos (1956). Postscript to the Third Man: A Reply to Mr. Geach. Philosophical Review 65 (1):83-94.
Wilfrid Sellars & Hector-Neri Castañeda (eds.) (1975). Action, Knowledge, and Reality. Indianapolis,Bobbs-Merrill.
Warner Fite (1913). The Man of Power: A Reply to Professor Rogers. Philosophical Review 22 (1):38-52.
Wilfrid Sellars (1955). Vlastos and "the Third Man". Philosophical Review 64 (3):405-437.
Gerard Casey (1995). Reply to Professor Anderson. Collection Development Bundle 69 (4):621-622.
William A. Rottschaefer (2011). The Middle Does Not Hold. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:361-369.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads19 ( #64,434 of 549,196 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,418 of 549,196 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
