References
H. Wettstein [1986], “Has Semantics Rested on A Mistake?”,Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 83, 185–209, reprinted in Wettstein [1991], H. Wettstein [1991],Has Semantics Rested On A Mistake? An Other Essays, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California 109–131.
H. Wettstein [1988], “Cognitive Significance Without Cognitive Content,”Mind 97, 1–28, reprinted in Wettstein [1991], H. Wetstein [1991],Has Semantics Rested On A Mistake? And Other Essays, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 132–158.
H. Wettstein [1989], “Turning The Tables on Frege, or How Is it That ‘Hesperus Is Hesperus’ Is Trivial” inPhilosophical Perspectives, Volume 3,Philosophy of Mind and Action Theory, edited by J. Tomberlin, California, Atascadero Ridgeview, 317–39, reprinted in Wettstein [1991], H. Wettstein [1991],Has Semantics Rested On A Mistake? And Other Essays, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California. 159–177.
H. Wettstein [1991],Has Semantics Rested On A Mistake? And Other Essays, Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Garavaso, P. Why the new theorist may still need to explain cognitive significance but not mind doing it. Philosophia 28, 455–465 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379794
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379794