Leibnitz's preference for an intensional logic (A reply to Mr. Parkinson)
Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 8 (3):254-256 (1967)
| 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: 5,631 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesE. H. Alves & J. A. D. Guerzoni (1990). Extending Montague's System: A Three Valued Intensional Logic. Studia Logica 49 (1):127 - 132.
Daniel Gallin (1975). Intensional and Higher-Order Modal Logic: With Applications to Montague Semantics. American Elsevier Pub. Co..
Reinhard Muskens (2007). Intensional Models for the Theory of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 (1):98-118.
Imre Ruzsa (1981). An Approach to Intensional Logic. Studia Logica 40 (3):269 - 287.
Fenrong Liu (2010). Von Wright's “the Logic of Preference” Revisited. Synthese 175 (1).
G. W. Leibnitz & A. E. Kroeger (1873). Leibnitz's Theodicy. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 7 (4):30 - 42.
Edward N. Zalta (1988). A Comparison of Two Intensional Logics. Linguistics and Philosophy 11 (1):59-89.
Matt Fairtlough & Michael Mendler (2003). Intensional Completeness in an Extension of Gödel/Dummett Logic. Studia Logica 73 (1):51 - 80.
Sven Ove Hansson (1989). A New Semantical Approach to the Logic of Preference. Erkenntnis 31 (1):1 - 42.
Churn-Jung Liau (2001). A Logical Analysis of the Relationship Between Commitment and Obligation. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10 (2):237-261.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2010-08-24Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
