Misunderstandings of epistemic tit for tat: Reply to John Woods

Journal of Philosophy 87 (7):369-374 (1990)
Abstract This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0022-362X
DOI jphil199087754
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 25,662
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Game Theory in Philosophy.Bruin Boudewijn De - 2005 - Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Testimony: A Primer.Martin Kusch & Peter Lipton - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (2):209-217.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Lightening Up on the Ad Hominem.John Woods - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (1):109-134.
Error.John Woods - manuscript
Laws of Thought and Epistemic Proofs.John Woods - 1979 - Idealistic Studies 9 (1):55-65.
The Ethics of Tit-for-Tat.Massimo Pigliucci - 2001 - Philosophy Now 33:28-29.
Epistemic Tit for Tat.Michel J. Blais - 1987 - Journal of Philosophy 84 (7):363-375.
The Maladroitness of Epistemic Tit for Tat.John Woods - 1989 - Journal of Philosophy 86 (6):324-331.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

14 ( #319,879 of 2,143,791 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #387,162 of 2,143,791 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums