Analysis 69 (1):99-100 (2009)

Abstract
The book is primarily an essay on the epistemology of the sort of armchair knowledge that we can hope to achieve in philosophy. The possibility of such knowledge is not to be explained by reinterpreting philosophical questions as questions about words or concepts. Although there are philosophical questions about words and concepts, most philosophical questions are not about words or concepts: they are, just as they seem to be, about the things, many of them independent of us, to which the words or concepts refer. Nor is our linguistic or conceptual competence the basis for our philosophical knowledge; such competence merely …
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/analys/ann018
Options
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: 56,913
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - Routledge.
Summary.Timothy Williamson - 2004 - Philosophical Books 45 (4):283-285.
Is Timothy Williamson a Necessary Existent?David Efird - 2010 - In Bob Hale & Aviv Hoffmann (eds.), Modality: Metaphysics, Logic, and Epistemology. Oxford University Press.
Williamson’s Argument Against the KK-Principle 157.Murali Ramachandran - 2005 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 1.
Why Williamson Should Be a Sceptic.Dylan Dodd - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (229):635–649.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-02-23

Total views
238 ( #36,592 of 2,409,633 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #189,364 of 2,409,633 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes