Results for 'The Bare-Difference Argument'

999 found
Order:
  1. Murdering an Accident Victim: A New Objection to the Bare-Difference Argument.Scott Hill - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (4):767-778.
    Many philosophers, psychologists, and medical practitioners believe that killing is no worse than letting die on the basis of James Rachels's Bare-Difference Argument. I show that his argument is unsound. In particular, a premise of the argument is that his examples are as similar as is consistent with one being a case of killing and the other being a case of letting die. However, the subject who lets die has both the ability to kill and the (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  2.  77
    Killing, Letting Die and the Bare Difference Argument.Royw Perrett - 1996 - Bioethics 10 (2):131–139.
    ABSTRACTI believe that there is no intrinsic moral difference between killing and letting die. That is, there is no difference that depends solely on the distinction between an act and an omission. I also believe that we can reasonably establish this thesis by appeal to the Bare Difference Argument. The form of this argument involves considering two imaginary cases in which there are no morally relevant differences present, save the bare difference that one is a case of killing (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  3. The Argument From Marginal Cases: Is Species a Relevant Difference.Julia Tanner - 2011 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 11 (2):225-235.
    Marginal humans are not rational yet we still think they are morally considerable. This is inconsistent with denying animals moral status on the basis of their irrationality. Therefore, either marginal humans and animals are both morally considerable or neither are. In this paper I consider a major objection to this argument: that species is a relevant difference between humans animals.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4.  6
    Counterlegals and the ‘Makes No Difference’ Argument.Seahwa Kim - 2009 - Erkenntnis 70 (3):419-426.
    In his 2003 paper, "Does the Existence of Mathematical Objects Make a Difference?", Alan Baker criticizes what he terms the 'Makes No Difference' argument by arguing that it does not succeed in undermining platonism. In this paper, I raise two objections. The first objection is that Baker is wrong in claiming that the premise of the MND argument lacks a truth-value. The second objection is that the theory of counterlegals which he appeals to in his argument is (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  47
    Counterlegals and the 'Makes No Difference' Argument.Seahwa Kim - 2009 - Erkenntnis 70 (3):419 - 426.
    In his 2003 paper, “Does the Existence of Mathematical Objects Make a Difference?”, Alan Baker criticizes what he terms the ‘Makes No Difference’ (MND) argument by arguing that it does not succeed in undermining platonism. In this paper, I raise two objections. The first objection is that Baker is wrong in claiming that the premise of the MND argument lacks a truth-value. The second objection is that the theory of counterlegals which he appeals to in his argument (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Carbon Leakage and the Argument From No Difference.Matthew Rendall - 2015 - Environmental Values 24 (4):535-52.
    Critics of carbon mitigation often appeal to what Jonathan Glover has called ‘the argument from no difference’: that is, ‘If I don’t do it, someone else will’. Yet even if this justifies continued high emissions by the industrialised countries, it cannot excuse business as usual. The North’s emissions might not harm the victims of climate change in the sense of making them worse off than they would otherwise be. Nevertheless, it receives benefits produced at the latter’s expense, with the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  11
    The Argument From Difference.Willis Doney - 1967 - Review of Metaphysics 21 (2):244 - 249.
    In the first premiss, how is the word 'different' used? If we are prepared to say that, in certain areas of discourse, the word 'different,' like the word 'same,' has two uses and that there are two senses of the word, there seem to be two ways of interpreting the first premiss. On the one hand, we can take the word 'different' to be used in the way in which it would be used if someone wished to point out that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. Locke and the Right to (Acquire) Property: A Lockean Argument for the Rawlsian Difference Principle.Richard Oxenberg - 2010 - Social Philosophy Today 26:55-66.
    The purpose of my paper is to show the derivation of what is sometimes called the ‘new liberalism’ (or ‘progressive liberalism’) from the basic principles of classical liberalism, through a reading of John Locke’s treatment of the right to property in his Second Treatise of Government. Locke’s work sharply distinguishes between the natural right to property in the ‘state of nature’ and the societal right to property as established in a socio-economic political system. Whereas the former does not depend on (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  14
    Locke and the Right to Property: A Lockean Argument for the Rawlsian Difference Principle.Richard Oxenberg - 2010 - Social Philosophy Today 26:55-66.
    The purpose of my paper is to show the derivation of what is sometimes called the ‘new liberalism’ from the basic principles of classical liberalism, through a reading of John Locke’s treatment of the right to property in his Second Treatise of Government. Locke’s work sharply distinguishes between the natural right to property in the ‘state of nature’ and the societal right to property as established in a socio-economic political system. Whereas the former does not depend on the consent of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  94
    Why the Difference Between Explanation and Argument Matters to Science Education.Ingo Brigandt - 2016 - Science & Education 25 (3-4):251-275.
    Contributing to the recent debate on whether or not explanations ought to be differentiated from arguments, this article argues that the distinction matters to science education. I articulate the distinction in terms of explanations and arguments having to meet different standards of adequacy. Standards of explanatory adequacy are important because they correspond to what counts as a good explanation in a science classroom, whereas a focus on evidence-based argumentation can obscure such standards of what makes an explanation explanatory. I provide (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  11.  68
    Addiction and the Value of Freedom.Graham Oddie - 1993 - Bioethics 7 (5):373-401.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  12. A Unified Analysis of the English Bare Plural.Greg N. Carlson - 1977 - Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (3):413 - 456.
    It is argued that the English bare plural (an NP with plural head that lacks a determiner), in spite of its apparently diverse possibilities of interpretation, is optimally represented in the grammar as a unified phenomenon. The chief distinction to be dealt with is that between the generic use of the bare plural (as in Dogs bark) and its existential or indefinite plural use (as in He threw oranges at Alice). The difference between these uses is not to be accounted (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   60 citations  
  13.  52
    “My Emissions Make No Difference”: Climate Change and the Argument From Inconsequentialism.Joakim Sandberg - 2011 - Environmental Ethics 33 (3):229-248.
    “Since the actions I perform as an individual only have an inconsequential effect on the threat of climate change,” a common argument goes, “it cannot be morally wrong for me to take my car to work everyday or refuse to recycle.” This argument has received a lot of scorn from philosophers over the years, but has actually been defended in some recent articles. A more systematic treatment of a central set of related issues shows how maneuvering around these (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  14. Explaining Leibniz Equivalence as Difference of Non-Inertial Appearances: Dis-Solution of the Hole Argument and Physical Individuation of Point-Events.Luca Lusanna & Massimo Pauri - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 37 (4):692-725.
    ”The last remnant of physical objectivity of space-time” is disclosed in the case of a continuous family of spatially non-compact models of general relativity. The physical individuation of point-events is furnished by the autonomous degrees of freedom of the gravitational field, which represent -as it were -the ontic part of the metric field. The physical role of the epistemic part is likewise clarified as embodying the unavoidable non-inertial aspects of GR. At the end the philosophical import of the Hole (...) is substantially weakened and in fact the Argument itself dis-solved, while a specific four-dimensional holistic and structuralist view of space-time emerges, including elements common to the tradition of both substantivalism and relationism. The observables of our models undergo real temporal change: this gives new evidence to the fact that statements like the frozen-time character of evolution, as other ontological claims about GR, are model dependent. (shrink)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  15.  9
    Justice, Difference, and the Possibility of Metaphysics: Towards a North American Philosophy of Liberation.James L. Marsh - 2002 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 76:57-76.
    What happened in New York City on September 11, 2001, creates an urgent need for a turn to practical reason, to ethics, to critique, and to a radical,transformative theory and praxis. Contemplation, speculation, pure theory, and contemplative metaphysics in philosophy, while necessary and valuable, are notsufficient in dealing with such an infamous crime against humanity. The central idea running through this paper and much of my work is that there is an essentiallink between rationality and radicalism. The aim of this (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  9
    Justice, Difference, and the Possibility of Metaphysics.James L. Marsh - 2002 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 76:57-76.
    What happened in New York City on September 11, 2001, creates an urgent need for a turn to practical reason, to ethics, to critique, and to a radical,transformative theory and praxis. Contemplation, speculation, pure theory, and contemplative metaphysics in philosophy, while necessary and valuable, are notsufficient in dealing with such an infamous crime against humanity. The central idea running through this paper and much of my work is that there is an essentiallink between rationality and radicalism. The aim of this (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  16
    The Under-Determination Objection to Deductive Bare-Difference Arguments.Thomas Metcalf - 2013 - Southwest Philosophy Review 29 (1):107-118.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  99
    The Nature of Developmental Constraints and the Difference-Maker Argument for Externalism.Roger Sansom - 2009 - Biology and Philosophy 24 (4):441-459.
    One current version of the internalism/externalism debate in evolutionary theory focuses on the relative importance of developmental constraints in evolutionary explanation. The received view of developmental constraints sees them as an internalist concept that tend to be shared across related species as opposed to selective pressures that are not. Thus, to the extent that constraints can explain anything, they can better explain similarity across species, while natural selection is better able to explain their differences. I challenge both of these aspects (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  19.  36
    A Note on Rawls'?Decision-Theoretic? Argument for the Difference Principle.Nollaig Mackenzie - 1977 - Theory and Decision 8 (4):381-385.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20.  14
    Genetic Enhancement and Procreative Autonomy: Liberal Eugenics According to One Version is Distinguished From Authoritarian Eugenics on the Basis That the Choice of Enhancement is Devolved to Parents. The Argument for Liberal Eugenics Combines a Commitment to the Right of Parents to Autonomy – in Reproductive Decisions and in the Upbringing of Children – and a Parity Claim That There is No Morally Significant Difference Between Ante-Natal and Post-Natal Alterations of a Child. The Article Reviews the Putative Constraints on Parental Choice, and Assesses Some Criticisms of the Parity Claim. It Concludes That a Liberal Commitment to Social Justice is in Tension with a Liberal Commitment to Parental Choice, but Judges That the Former Commitment Does Not Entail the Authoritarian Eugenics Which is Represented as the Alternative to Liberal Eugenics. [REVIEW]David Archard - 2007 - Law and Ethics of Human Rights 1 (1).
  21. My Brain Made Me Do It: The Exclusion Argument Against Free Will, and What’s Wrong with It.Christian List & Peter Menzies - 2017 - In H. Beebee, C. Hitchcock & H. Price (eds.), Making a Difference: Essays on the Philosophy of Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    We offer a critical assessment of the “exclusion argument” against free will, which may be summarized by the slogan: “My brain made me do it, therefore I couldn't have been free”. While the exclusion argument has received much attention in debates about mental causation (“could my mental states ever cause my actions?”), it is seldom discussed in relation to free will. However, the argument informally underlies many neuroscientific discussions of free will, especially the claim that advances in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  22. The Pareto Argument for Inequality Revisited.A. R. J. Fisher & Edward F. McClennen - manuscript
    One of the more obscure arguments for Rawls’ difference principle dubbed ‘the Pareto argument for inequality’ has been criticised by G. A. Cohen (1995, 2008) as being inconsistent. In this paper, we examine and clarify the Pareto argument in detail and argue (1) that justification for the Pareto principles derives from rational selfinterest and thus the Pareto principles ought to be understood as conditions of individual rationality, (2) that the Pareto argument is not inconsistent, contra Cohen, and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  23. The Argument From Marginal Cases and the Slippery Slope Objection.Julia K. Tanner - 2009 - Environmental Values 18 (1):51-66.
    Rationality (or something similar) is usually given as the relevant difference between all humans and animals; the reason humans do but animals do not deserve moral consideration. But according to the Argument from Marginal Cases not all humans are rational, yet if such (marginal) humans are morally considerable despite lacking rationality it would be arbitrary to deny animals with similar capacities a similar level of moral consideration. The slippery slope objection has it that although marginal humans are not strictly (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  24. The Difference Principle Would Not Be Chosen Behind the Veil of Ignorance.Johan E. Gustafsson - 2018 - Journal of Philosophy 115 (11):588-604.
    John Rawls argues that the Difference Principle would be chosen by parties trying to advance their individual interests behind the Veil of Ignorance. Behind this veil, the parties do not know who they are and they are unable to assign or estimate probabilities to their turning out to be any particular person in society. Much discussion of Rawls’s argument concerns whether he can plausibly rule out the parties’ having access to probabilities about who they are. Nevertheless, I argue that, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. The Marginal Cases Argument: Animals Matter Too.Julia Tanner - 2005 - Think 4 (10):53-62..
    If we are going to treat other species so very differently from our own — killing, eating and experimenting on pigs and sheep, for example, but never human beings — then it seems we need to come up with some morally relevant difference between us and them that justifies this difference in treatment. Otherwise it appears we are guilty of bigotry (in just the same way that someone who discriminates on the basis of race or sex is guilty of bigotry). (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  26. INTRODUCTION: The Evidential Argument From Evil.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 1996 - In The Evidential Argument from Evil.
    Evil, it is often said, poses a problem for theism, the view that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being, "God," for short. This problem is usually called "the problem of evil." But this is a bad name for what philosophers study under that rubric. They study what is better thought of as an argument, or a host of arguments, rather than a problem. Of course, an argument from evil against theism can be both an (...) and a problem. Some people realize this for the first time when they assert an argument from evil in print and someone publishes a .reply in which numerous defects and oversights are laid bare for the public eye. And if it turns out that there is a God and He doesn't take kindly to such arguments, then an argument from evil might be a big problem, a very big problem, for one who sincerely propounds it. Typically, however, an argument from evil is not thought to be a problem for the atheist. But if not for the atheist, for whom is an argument from evil a "problem"? (shrink)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  27. Novel Predictions and the No Miracle Argument.Mario Alai - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (2):297-326.
    Predictivists use the no miracle argument to argue that “novel” predictions are decisive evidence for theories, while mere accommodation of “old” data cannot confirm to a significant degree. But deductivists claim that since confirmation is a logical theory-data relationship, predicted data cannot confirm more than merely deduced data, and cite historical cases in which known data confirmed theories quite strongly. On the other hand, the advantage of prediction over accommodation is needed by scientific realists to resist Laudan’s criticisms of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  28.  19
    On the Continuing Utility of Argument in a Postmodern World.Richard A. Cherwitz & Thomas J. Darwin - 1995 - Argumentation 9 (1):181-202.
    In this essay we contend that traditional theories of argument are consonant with and enrich the project of postmodernity. Reading postmodernity as ‘a rhetoric’ underscores how the process of discursively resolving conflicts is occasionally threatened by politically motivated efforts to misuse the methods of argument; it alerts us to the egregious acts that are and can be performed ‘in the name of,’ but not because of, rationality. Postmodernity is thus an attempt by a new generation of theorists to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29.  29
    The Causal Closure Argument is No Threat to Non-Reductive Physicalism.Peter Menzies - 2015 - Humana Mente 8 (29).
    Non-reductive physicalism is the view that mental events cause other events in virtue of their mental properties and that mental properties supervene on, without being identical to, physical properties. Jaegwon Kim has presented several much-discussed arguments against this view. But the much simpler causal closure argument, which purports to establish that every mental property is identical to a physical property, has received less attention than Kim’s arguments. This paper aims to show how a non-reductive physicalist should rebut the causal (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  30.  21
    Individuals’ Contributions to Harmful Climate Change: The Fair Share Argument Restated.Christian Baatz & Lieske Voget-Kleschin - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (4):569-590.
    In the climate ethics debate, scholars largely agree that individuals should promote institutions that ensure the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper aims to establish that there are individual duties beyond compliance with and promotion of institutions. Duties of individuals to reduce their emissions are often objected to by arguing that an individual’s emissions do not make a morally relevant difference. We challenge this argument from inconsequentialism in two ways. We first show why the argument also seems (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  31.  83
    Neural and Environmental Modulation of Motivation: What's the Moral Difference?Thomas Douglas - forthcoming - In David Birks & Thomas Douglas (eds.), Treatment for Crime: Philosophical Essays on Neurointerventions in Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Interventions that modify a person’s motivations through chemically or physically influencing the brain seem morally objectionable, at least when they are performed nonconsensually. This chapter raises a puzzle for attempts to explain their objectionability. It first seeks to show that the objectionability of such interventions must be explained at least in part by reference to the sort of mental interference that they involve. It then argues that it is difficult to furnish an explanation of this sort. The difficulty is that (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  32.  71
    Argument Quality and Cultural Difference.Siegel Harvey - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (2):183-201.
    Central to argumentation theory is a concern with normativity. Argumentation theorists are concerned, among other things, with explaining why some arguments are good (or at least better than others) in the sense that a given argument provides reasons for embracing its conclusion which are such that a fair- minded appraisal of the argument yields the judgment that the conclusion ought to be accepted -- is worthy of acceptance -- by all who so appraise it.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  33. A Critique of the Incentives Argument for Inequalities.Max Seeger - 2011 - Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy 25 (1):40-52.
    According to the incentives argument, inequalities in material goods are justifiable if they are to the benefit of the worst off members of society. In this paper, I point out what is easily overlooked, namely that inequalities are justifiable only if they are to the overall benefit of the worst off, that is, in terms of both material and social goods. I then address the question how gains in material goods can be weighed against probable losses in social goods. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  34. The Backward Induction Argument for the Finite Iterated Prisoner’s Dilemma and the Surprise Exam Paradox.Luc Bovens - 1997 - Analysis 57 (3):179–186.
    There are two curious features about the backward induction argument (BIA) to the effect that repeated non-cooperation is the rational solution to the finite iterated prisoner’s dilemma (FIPD). First, however compelling the argument may seem, one remains hesitant either to recommend this solu- tion to players who are about to engage in cooperation or to explain cooperation as a deviation from rational play in real-life FIPD’s. Second, there seems to be a similarity between the BIA for the FIPD (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  35.  4
    Why the Fair Innings Argument is Not Persuasive.Michael M. Rivlin - 2000 - BMC Medical Ethics 1 (1):1.
    The fair innings argument is frequently put forward as a justification for denying elderly patients treatment when they are in competition with younger patients and resources are scarce. In this paper I will examine some arguments that are used to support the FIA. My conclusion will be that they do not stand up to scrutiny and therefore, the FIA should not be used to justify the denial of treatment to elderly patients, or to support rationing of health care by (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  36.  34
    Reiman on Labor, Value, and the Difference Principle.Jan Narveson - 2014 - The Journal of Ethics 18 (1):47-74.
    In As Free and as Just as Possible: The Theory of Marxian Liberalism, Jeffrey Reiman proposes to develop a theory of “Marxian Liberalism.” ‘Liberalism’ here is defined by the principle that “sane adult human beings should be free in the sense of free from coercion that would block their ability to act on the choices they make.” While the idea of coercion could use some glossing, it is not obvious that poverty, unemployment, racism, and sexism are as such coercive. In (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  37. Molinists (Still) Cannot Endorse the Consequence Argument.Yishai Cohen - 2015 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 77 (3):231-246.
    Perszyk has argued that Molinists cannot consistently endorse the consequence argument because of a structurally similar argument for the incompatibility of true Molinist counterfactuals of freedom and the ability to do otherwise. Wierenga has argued that on the proper understanding of CCFs, there is a relevant difference between the consequence argument and the anti-Molinist argument. I argue that, even on Wierenga’s understanding of CCFs, there is in fact no relevant difference between the two arguments. Moreover, I (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  38.  13
    The “Ontological Difference” Again. A Dialetheic Perspective on Heidegger’s Mainstay.Francesco Gandellini - 2018 - Open Philosophy 1 (1):143-154.
    This paper intends to offer a new assessment of the “Ontological Difference”, one of Martin Heidegger’s mainstays, in the light of the metaphysical view called “dialetheism”. In the first paragraph I briefly summarize the main argument of Heidegger’s contradiction of Being, where OD is present as a premise. In the second paragraph I introduce dialetheism, indicate two kinds of dialetheic solutions to the paradox and explain why they face comeback troubles from OD. The third paragraph is devoted to a (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. Haecceitas and the Bare Particular: A Study of Duns Scotus' Theory of Individuation.Woosuk Park - 1988 - Dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo
    This dissertation consists of a philosophico-historical study of Duns Scotus' theory of individuation. In order to do justice to the history of philosophy, it grants a fair hearing to the problem of individuation as he conceived it, his criticisms of various theories available at his time, and his own intriguing theory of haecceitas. His doctrines of the formal distinction, the real unity of the common nature, and ultimate differences are studied in some detail because his explanation of haecceitas by a (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  40.  13
    Definiteness in Nuosu Yi and the Theory of Argument Formation.Li Jiang - 2018 - Linguistics and Philosophy 41 (1):1-39.
    This paper analyzes argument formation in Nuosu Yi, a language that is typologically unusual in having classifiers as well as a definite determiner. Also unusual is the fact that demonstratives do not combine directly with nouns in this language but require the mediation of classifiers. Properties such as these are shown to pose a challenge to current accounts of argument formation. The Neocarlsonian approach of Chierchia explains the absence of definite articles in classifier languages as resulting from considerations (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41.  1
    Dialetheism and the Problem of the Missing Difference.Gregory Scott Moss - 2018 - SATS 19 (2):89-110.
    During the past few decades, Graham Priest has advocated for Dialetheism, the controversial position that some contradictions are true. Dialetheism entails that the Law of Non-Contradiction fails. In recent decades the philosophical community has begun to recognize the significant challenge posed by Priest’s arguments. Priest has primarily appealed to paradoxes of self-reference, such as the Liar Paradox, to support his position. Following Priest’s approach, I offer another argument for Dialetheism, which appeals to a self-referential paradox that has been more (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. The Kalam Cosmological Argument in Contemporary Analytic Philosophy.Mark R. Nowacki - 2002 - Dissertation, The Catholic University of America
    Approximately 1,500 years ago John Philoponus proposed a simple argument for the existence of God. The argument runs thus: Whatever comes to be has a cause of its coming to be. The universe came to be. Therefore, the universe has a cause of its coming to be. ;Due to the influence of William Lane Craig, this argument and the family of arguments that support it have come to be known as the "kalam" cosmological argument . Craig's (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43.  70
    The Threat of Effective Intentions to Moral Responsibility in the Zygote Argument.Robyn Repko Waller - 2013 - Philosophia 42 (1):209-222.
    In Free Will and Luck, Mele presents a case of an agent Ernie, whose zygote was intentionally designed so that Ernie A-s in 30 years, bringing about a certain event E. Mele uses this case of original design to outline the zygote argument against compatibilism. In this paper I criticize the zygote argument. Unlike other compatibilists who have responded to the zygote argument, I contend that it is open to the compatibilist to accept premise one, that Ernie (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  44. The Difference Principle: Incentives or Equality?Luca Ferrero - unknown
    1.1.1 In a recent series of papers, G.A. Cohen has presented an egalitarian interpretation of the Difference Principle (hereafter, DP).1 According to this principle—first introduced by Rawls in A Theory of Justice2—inequalities in the distribution of primary goods3 are legitimate only to the extent that they maximize the prospects of the least advantaged members of society. Cohen argues that, once it is properly applied, DP does not legitimate any departure from equality. According to him, the distribution that maximizes the prospects (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  35
    Bare Nouns and Number in Dëne Sųłiné.Andrea Wilhelm - 2008 - Natural Language Semantics 16 (1):39-68.
    This paper documents the number-related properties of Dëne Sųłiné (Athapaskan). Dëne Sųłiné has neither number inflection nor numeral classifiers. Nouns are bare, occur as such in argument positions, and combine directly with numerals. With these traits, Dëne Sųłiné represents a type of language that is little considered in formal typologies of number and countability. The paper critiques one influential proposal, that of Chierchia (in: Rothstein (ed.) Events and grammar, 1998a; Natural Language Semantics 6: 339–405, 1998b), and presents an alternative (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  46. Kant’s Religious Argument for the Existence of God: The Ultimate Dependence of Human Destiny on Divine Assistance.Stephen R. Palmquist - 2009 - Faith and Philosophy 26 (1):3-22.
    After reviewing Kant’s well-known criticisms of the traditional proofs of God’s existence and his preferred moral argument, this paper presents a detailedanalysis of a densely-packed theistic argument in Religion within the Bounds of Bare Reason. Humanity’s ultimate moral destiny can be fulfilled only through organized religion, for only by participating in a religious community can we overcome the evil in human nature. Yet we cannot conceive how such a community can even be founded without presupposing God’s existence. Viewing (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  47. Review of Henry Somers-Hall. Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation: Dialectics of Negation and Difference. [REVIEW]Martijn Boven - 2012 - Review of Metaphysics 66 (2):384-386.
    In this rich and impressive new book, Henry Somers- Hall gives a nuanced analysis of the philosophical relationship between G. W. F. Hegel and Gilles Deleuze. He convincingly shows that a serious study of Hegel provides an improved insight into Deleuze’s conception of pure difference as the transcendental condition of identity. Somers- Hall develops his argument in three steps. First, both Hegel and Deleuze formulate a critique of representation. Second, Hegel’s proposed alternative is as logically consistent as Deleuze’s. Third, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  40
    Inference to the Best Explanation in the Catch-22: How Much Autonomy for Mill’s Method of Difference?Raphael Scholl - 2015 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 5 (1):89-110.
    In his seminal Inference to the Best Explanation, Peter Lipton adopted a causal view of explanation and a broadly Millian view of how causal knowledge is obtained. This made his account vulnerable to critics who charged that Inference to the Best Explanation is merely a dressed-up version of Mill’s methods, which in the critics’ view do the real inductive work. Lipton advanced two arguments to protect Inference to the Best Explanation against this line of criticism: the problem of multiple differences (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  49.  15
    ‘Prosthetic Fit’: On Personal Identity and the Value of Bodily Difference. [REVIEW]Medard Hilhorst - 2004 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 7 (3):303-310.
    It is within the context of a person’s lifestory, we argue, that the idea of wearing aprosthesis assumes place and meaning. Todevelop this argument, a brightly colored hookprosthesis for children is taken as a startingpoint for reflection. The prosthesis can beseen as fitting this person perfectly, when thebodily difference is understood as positivelyadding to this person’s identity. The choicefor the prosthesis is normative in a moralsense, in that it is grounded in a person’sfundamental convictions with respect to hisbeing and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50.  41
    Making a Difference: Essays on the Philosophy of Causation.Helen Beebee, Christopher Hitchcock & Huw Price (eds.) - 2017 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Making a Difference presents fifteen original essays on causation and counterfactuals by an international team of experts. Collectively, they represent the state of the art on these topics. The essays in this volume are inspired by the life and work of Peter Menzies, who made a difference in the lives of students, colleagues, and friends. Topics covered include: the semantics of counterfactuals, agency theories of causation, the context-sensitivity of causal claims, structural equation models, mechanisms, mental causation, causal exclusion argument, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
1 — 50 / 999