Similar but not the same: Various versions of ♣ do not coincide

Journal of Symbolic Logic 64 (1):180 - 198 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We consider various versions of the ♣ principle. This principle is a known consequence of $\lozenge$ . It is well known that $\lozenge$ is not sensitive to minor changes in its definition, e.g., changing the guessing requirement form "guessing exactly" to "guessing modulo a finite set". We show however, that this is not true for ♣. We consider some other variants of ♣ as well

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,928

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

Against Logical Versions of the Direct Argument: A New Counterexample.Seth Shabo - 2010 - American Philosophical Quarterly 47 (3):239-252.
Club guessing sequences and filters.Tetsuya Ishiu - 2005 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 70 (4):1037-1071.
Causal decision theory.David Lewis - 1981 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 59 (1):5 – 30.
Nonstandard set theory.Peter Fletcher - 1989 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 54 (3):1000-1008.
On not Harming: Two traditions.Barbara MacKinnon - 1988 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 13 (3):313-328.
The Principle of Charity, Transcendentalism and Relativism.María Rosario Hernández Borges - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:69-75.
Universals: Ways or Things?Scott Berman - 2008 - Metaphysica 9 (2):219-234.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
55 (#290,525)

6 months
18 (#141,247)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Džamonja Mirna
University of East Anglia

Citations of this work

Towers and clubs.Pierre Matet - 2021 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 60 (6):683-719.
Finding generic filters by playing games.Heike Mildenberger - 2010 - Archive for Mathematical Logic 49 (1):91-118.

Add more citations