10. conclusion

In Nature, Contemplation, and the One: A Study in the Philosophy of Plotinus. University of Toronto Press. pp. 110-117 (1967)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,322

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

Two types of multiple-conclusion systems.A. Avron - 1998 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 6 (5):695-718.
In defence of repugnance.Michael Huemer - 2008 - Mind 117 (468):899-933.
Probability and scepticism.Brian Weatherson - 2014 - In Dylan Dodd Elia Zardini (ed.), Scepticism and Perceptual Justification. Oxford University Press. pp. 71-86.
Let's admit that Islam is a problem.John L. Perkins - 2015 - Australian Humanist, The 118:18.
Faith and the Existence of God.R. G. Swinburne - 1988 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 24:121-143.
Does the repugnant conclusion have any probative force?Christopher Cowie - 2017 - Philosophical Studies 174 (12):3021-3039.
The Very Repugnant Conclusion.Gustaf Arrhenius - 2003 - In Krister Segerberg & Ryszard Sliwinski (eds.), Logic, Law, Morality: Thirteen Essays in Practical Philosophy in Honour of Lennart Åqvist. Department of Philosophy, Uppsala University. pp. 29-44.
Some multi-conclusion modal paralogics.Casey McGinnis - 2007 - Logica Universalis 1 (2):335-353.
Negative Average Preference Utilitarianism.Roger Chao - 2012 - Journal of Philosophy of Life 2 (1):55-66.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-07-08

Downloads
2 (#1,780,599)

6 months
1 (#1,533,009)

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