Reply to critics

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 53 (3):83-91 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The author addresses his replies to the issues raised in the comments by Professors Berestov, Butakov, Gaginsky and Maslov. This includes some general points about methodology for skeptical arguments, and a related point about the scope of John Greco's project. Some more specific issues raised by my commentators are then considered.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

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

Reply to Critics.Evgeny V. Borisov - 2024 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 61 (2):89-94.
Reply to critics.Evgeny Borisov - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 50 (4):59-62.
Reply to critics.Vadim Mezhuev - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 47 (1):62-66.
Reply to Critics.Karen Momdzhyan - 2015 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 45 (3):45-53.
Reply to Critics.Alexander L. Nikiforov - 2015 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 46 (4):50-51.
Reply to critics.Alexander M. Dorozhkin - 2017 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 54 (4):47-48.
Reply to critics.В.М Межуев - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 47 (1):62-66.
Reply to Critics.Tatiana D. Sokolova - 2023 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 60 (2):72-74.
Reply to Critics.Natalia I. Kuznetsova - 2024 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 61 (1):72-74.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-08-24

Downloads
20 (#181,865)

6 months
1 (#1,912,481)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Greco
Georgetown University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references