Analysis 74 (1):3-5 (2014)

There are problems both with the supposition that ‘fish’ was once used with a meaning that includes whales, and with the supposition that it has always been used with a meaning that excludes them. The problems are illustrated by a trial in 1818 in which the jury ruled that whales are fish
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/analys/ant098
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 54,593
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Meaning of 'Meaning'.Hilary Putnam - 1975 - Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7:131-193.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Importance of Concepts.Sarah Sawyer - 2018 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 118 (2):127-147.
Talk and Thought.Sarah Sawyer - 2020 - In Alexis Burgess, Herman Cappelen & David Plunkett (eds.), Conceptual Engineering and Conceptual Ethics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 379-395.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Fishy? [REVIEW]Roger Green - 2003 - The Classical Review 53 (2):383-384.
On What’s Fishy About Civic Engagement.A. David Kline - 2005 - Teaching Ethics 6 (1):29-36.
Lockhead's View of Scaling: Something's Fishy Here.Stanley J. Bolanowski - 1992 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 15 (3):560-560.
Knowing and Saying We Know.Jeff Johnson - 2000 - Essays in Philosophy 1 (2):4.
Globalization and the Ethics of Business.John R. Boatright - 2000 - Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (1):1-6.


Added to PP index

Total views
72 ( #134,475 of 2,385,755 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #559,864 of 2,385,755 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes