What fools we were

The Philosophers' Magazine 49:93-97 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Don didn’t grasp what would eventually come to be one of the most successful ad campaigns ever because he didn’t recognise the person presenting the evidence as being appropriately trustworthy. He failed to know because Dr Guttman’s say-so was not enough to provide justification for a belief. But why would he think that? To get to the bottom of this, we need the help of an analytical approach known as standpoint theory.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,247

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What Fools We Were.Landon Schurtz - 2010 - The Philosophers' Magazine 49 (49):93-97.
Three Perspectives on a Journalistic Approach.Ilie Rad, Aurel-Teodor Codoban & Nicolae Cretu - 2010 - Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 9 (27):344-355.
The Ship of Fools.Anja Steinbauer - 2014 - Philosophy Now 101:6-6.
Stage of Fools.[author unknown] - 1953 - Thought: Fordham University Quarterly 28 (4):631-631.
Fakes, Frauds, and Fools.Don Douglas Stewart - 1972 - Miracle Valley, Ariz., Don Stewart Evangelistic Assoc..
On Plato's Ship of Fools.T. D. Seymour - 1902 - The Classical Review 16 (08):385-387.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-17

Downloads
5 (#1,160,787)

6 months
1 (#415,205)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references