19 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
David Manley [17]D. Manley [2]
See also:
Profile: David Manley (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor)
  1. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2014). Response. Mind and Language 29 (4):499-510.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Billy Dunaway, Anna Edmonds & David Manley (2013). The Folk Probably Do Think What You Think They Think. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (3):421-441.
  3. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2012). The Reference Book. Oxford University Press.
    This book critically examines some widespread views about the semantic phenomenon of reference and the cognitive phenomenon of singular thought. It begins with a defense of the view that neither is tied to a special relation of causal or epistemic acquaintance. It then challenges the alleged semantic rift between definite and indefinite descriptions on the one hand, and names and demonstratives on the other—a division that has been motivated in part by appeals to considerations of acquaintance. Drawing on recent work (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. D. Manley & R. Wasserman (2012). Dispositions, Conditionals, and Counterexamples. Mind 120 (480):1191-1227.
    In an earlier paper in these pages (2008), we explored the puzzling link between dispositions and conditionals. First, we rehearsed the standard counterexamples to the simple conditional analysis and the refined conditional analysis defended by David Lewis. Second, we attacked a tempting response to these counterexamples: what we called the ‘getting specific strategy’. Third, we presented a series of structural considerations that pose problems for many attempts to understand the link between dispositions and conditionals. Finally, we developed our own account (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. David Manley (2012). Dispositionality: Beyond The Biconditionals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (2):321 - 334.
    Suppose dispositions bear a distinctive connection to counterfactual facts, perhaps one that could be enshrined in a variation on the well-worn schema ?Necessarily, x is disposed to ? in ? iff x would ? in ??. Could we exploit this connection to provide an account of what it is to be a disposition? This paper is about four views of dispositionality that attempt to do so.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. D. Chalmers, D. Manley & R. Wasserman (eds.) (2009). Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
  7. David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.) (2009). Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
    This volume concerns the status and ambitions of metaphysics as a discipline.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. David Manley (2009). Introduction : A Guided Tour of Metametaphysics. In David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
    Metaphysics is concerned with the foundations of reality. It asks questions about the nature of the world, such as: Aside from concrete objects, are there also abstract objects like numbers and properties? Does every event have a cause? What is the nature of possibility and necessity? When do several things make up a single bigger thing? Do the past and future exist? And so on. -/- Metametaphysics is concerned with the foundations of metaphysics. It asks: Do the questions of metaphysics (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. David Manley (2009). When Best Theories Go Bad. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):392-405.
    It is common for contemporary metaphysical realists to adopt Quine's criterion of ontological commitment while at the same time repudiating his ontological pragmatism. 2 Drawing heavily from the work of others—especially Joseph Melia and Stephen Yablo—I will argue that the resulting approach to meta-ontology is unstable. In particular, if we are metaphysical realists, we need not accept ontological commitment to whatever is quantified over by our best first-order theories.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (2008). On Linking Dispositions and Conditionals. Mind 117 (465):59-84.
    Analyses of dispositional ascriptions in terms of conditional statements famously confront the problems of finks and masks. We argue that conditional analyses of dispositions, even those tailored to avoid.nks and masks, face five further problems. These are the problems of: (i) Achilles' heels, (ii) accidental closeness, (iii) comparatives, (iv) explaining context sensitivity, and (v) absent stimulus conditions. We conclude by offering a proposal that avoids all seven of these problems. CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this?
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. David Manley (2007). Review of Fabrice Correia, Existential Dependence and Cognate Notions. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2007 (2).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. David Manley (2007). Safety, Content, Apriority, Self-Knowledge. Journal of Philosophy 104 (8):403-423.
    This essay motivates a revised version of the epistemic condition of safety and then employs the revision to (i) challenge traditional conceptions of apriority, (ii) refute ‘strong privileged access’, and (iii) resolve a well-known puzzle about externalism and self-knowledge.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (2007). A Gradable Approach to Dispositions. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (226):68–75.
    Previous theories of the relationship between dispositions and conditionals are unable to account for the fact that dispositions come in degrees. We propose a fix for this problem that has the added benefit of avoiding the classic problems of finks and masks.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2005). Review of Stephen Mumford's Dispositions. [REVIEW] Noûs 39:179-95.
    In Mumford’s Dispositions, the reader will find an extended treatment of the recent debate about dispositions from Ryle and Geach to the present. Along the way, Mumford presents his own views on several key points, though we found the book much more thorough in its assessment of opposing views than in the development of a positive account. As we’ll try to make clear, some of the ideas endorsed in Dispositions are certainly worth pursuing; others are not. Following Mackie, Shoemaker, and (...)
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. John Hawthorne & David Manley (2005). Stephen Mumford. Dispositions. . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. 261 Pp. [REVIEW] Noûs 39 (1):179–195.
    In Mumford’s Dispositions, the reader will find an extended treatment of the recent debate about dispositions from Ryle and Geach to the present. Along the way, Mumford presents his own views on several key points, though we found the book much more thorough in its assessment of opposing views than in the development of a positive account. As we’ll try to make clear, some of the ideas endorsed in Dispositions are certainly worth pursuing; others are not. Following Mackie, Shoemaker, and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. David Manley (2002). Properties and Resemblance Classes. Noûs 36 (1):75–96.
    There are two major theories of properties that employ resemblance classes to avoid commitment to universals.1 Object-resemblance nominalism ~ORN! faces the notorious companionship and imperfect community difficulties, though some costly remedies have been proposed. Trope-resemblance nominalism ~TRN!, in contrast, is commonly supposed to avoid these difficulties altogether. My contention is that both versions of resemblance nominalism are subject to companionship and imperfect community difficulties. If I am right, ~1! trope theory loses one of its primary selling points, and ~2! resemblance (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation