11 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Charles Hermes [7]Charles M. Hermes [4]
See also:
Profile: Charles Hermes (University of Texas at Arlington)
  1. Charles Hermes, Truthmakers and the Consequence Argument.
    Recent work in the truthmakers literature demonstrates that the logic of truthmaking is distinct from classical logic. Since free will is an ontological issue, and not merely a semantic issue, arguments about free will ought to be sensitive to these developments. In Truthmakers and the Direct Argument, Hermes argues that one of the main arguments for incompatibiilsm fails precisely where the truthmakers literature would predict. Here, I argue that similar problems make the Consequence Argument untenable.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Charles Hermes (2014). A Counterexample to A. Philosophia 42 (2):387-389.
    The Direct Argument is an important argument for demonstrating that moral responsibility is incompatible with determinism because it makes no presuppositions about the nature of free will. One of the inference rules employed in the Direct Argument is rule A: If a proposition is broadly logically necessary, then it is true and no one is, nor ever has been, even partially morally responsible for the fact that the proposition is true. While inference rule A is assumed by all parties to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Charles Hermes (2014). Forms of Thought: A Study in Philosophical Logic. [REVIEW] Philosophical Quarterly 64 (255):352-354.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Charles Hermes (2013). Truthmakers and the Direct Argument. Philosophical Studies (2):401-418.
    The truthmaker literature has recently come to the consensus that the logic of truthmaking is distinct from classical propositional logic. This development has huge implications for the free will literature. Since free will and moral responsibility are primarily ontological concerns (and not semantic concerns) the logic of truthmaking ought to be central to the free will debate. I shall demonstrate that counterexamples to transfer principles employed in the direct argument occur precisely where a plausible logic of truthmaking diverges from classical (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Charles Hermes (2012). Functions and Altered States in Dispositional Analysis: A Reply to Vihvelin. Philosophical Studies (1):1-7.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Charles Hermes & Joe Campbell (2012). More Trouble for Direct Source Incompatibilism: Reply to Yang. [REVIEW] Acta Analytica 27 (3):335-344.
    Direct source incompatibilism (DSI) is the conjunction of two claims: SI-F: there are genuine Frankfurt-style counterexamples (FSCs); SI-D: there is a sound version of the direct argument (DA). Eric Yang ( 2012 ) responds to a recent criticism of DSI (Campbell 2006 ). We show that Yang misses the mark. One can accept Yang’s criticisms and get the same result: there is a deep tension between FSCs and DA, between SI-F and SI-D. Thus, DSI is untenable. In this essay, we (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Charles M. Hermes (2007). Cognitive Peers and Self-Deception. Teorema: Revista Internacional de Filosofía 26 (3):123-130.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Charles Hermes (2006). Does Attempting to Try to A Imply Trying to A? Southwest Philosophy Review 22 (2):63-70.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Charles M. Hermes, Scientific Essentialism and the Lewis/Ramsey Account of Laws of Nature.
    Humean interpretations claim that laws of nature merely summarize events. Non-Humean interpretations claim that laws force events to occur in certain patterns. First, I show that the Lewis/Ramsey account of lawhood, which claims that laws are axioms or theorems of the simplest strongest summary of events, provides the best Humean interpretation of laws. The strongest non-Humean account, the scientific essentialist position, grounds laws of nature in essential non-reducible dispositional properties held by natural kinds. The scientific essentialist account entails that laws (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Charles M. Hermes (2006). The Overdetermination Argument Against Eliminativism. Southwest Philosophy Review 22 (1):113-119.
  11. Charles M. Hermes (2004). Two Concepts of Nomlc Accessibility. Southwest Philosophy Review 20 (2):87-94.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation