Gonseth and Quine

Dialectica 55 (3):199–219 (2001)

Authors
Michael Esfeld
University of Lausanne
Abstract
This paper compares the four principles of Gonseth’s epistemology with Quine’s “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”. It is shown how Gonseth’s epistemology avoids the main objections to Quine’s holism. On this basis, the relevance of Gonseth’s epistemology for today’s discussion is assessed
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1746-8361.2001.tb00216.x
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 47,149
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
Mind and World.John McDowell - 1994 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.

View all 77 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Quine’s Naturalized Epistemology and the Third Dogma of Empiricism.Robert Sinclair - 2007 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):455-472.
Naturalized Epistemology and Epistemic Evaluation.Christopher Hookway - 1994 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 37 (4):465 – 485.
Quine's Two Dogmas.Elliott Sober - 2000 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 74:237-280.
Naturalistic Epistemology for Eliminative Materialists.Alex Rosenberg - 1999 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59 (2):335-358.
Every Dogma has its Day.Richard Creath - 1991 - Erkenntnis 35 (1-3):347-389.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
50 ( #179,126 of 2,289,307 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #589,325 of 2,289,307 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature