Synthese 42 (2):223 - 253 (1979)
On prior's reconstruction, The master argument of diodorus contains an equivocation and so is invalid for one class of diodorean "propositions." but diodorus knew of such "propositions" and an argument in his treatment of motion can be used to bring them under the master argument's sway. Also, Despite the consensus of antiquity, The master argument does not commit diodorus to determinism, Although it commits him to non-Deterministic theses which can be easily misinterpreted as deterministic
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
What Is the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus?Frederick Seymour Michael - 1976 - American Philosophical Quarterly 13 (3):229 - 235.
Aristotle and the "Master Argument" of Diodorus.Jaakko Hintikka - 1964 - American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (2):101 - 114.
Diodorus and the “Master Argument”.John Sutula - 1976 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 14 (3):323-343.
A Version of the "Master Argument" of Diodorus.Nicholas Rescher - 1966 - Journal of Philosophy 63 (15):438-445.
Chrysippus's Response to Diodorus's Master Argument.Harry Ide - 1992 - History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (2):133-148.
The Tense Logic for Master Argument in Prior's Reconstruction.Tomasz Jarmużek & Andrzej Pietruszczak - 2009 - Studia Logica 92 (1):85 - 108.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #119,603 of 2,178,129 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #316,663 of 2,178,129 )
How can I increase my downloads?