The Reasoner 3 (2009)
Abstract |
This is the third installment of a paper which deals with comparison and evaluation of the standard slingshot argument (for the claim that all true sentences, if they refer, refer to the same object) with the doxastic formulation.
|
Keywords | slingshot philosophy of language substitution |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Metaphysics, Substitution Salva Veritate and the Slingshot Argument.Robert J. Stainton - 2005 - In Alex Barber (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Elsevier. pp. 73--82.
Evading the Slingshot.John Perry - 1996 - In J. Ezquerro A. Clark (ed.), Philosophy and Cognitive Science: Categories, Consciousness, and Reasoning. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Alethic Statements Are Not Intensional.Ari Maunu - 2006 - Teorema: International Journal of Philosophy 25 (3):53-61.
The Slingshot Argument and the Correspondence Theory of Truth.James O. Young - 2002 - Acta Analytica 17 (2):121-132.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2010-08-17
Total views
70 ( #140,893 of 2,403,360 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #361,463 of 2,403,360 )
2010-08-17
Total views
70 ( #140,893 of 2,403,360 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #361,463 of 2,403,360 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads