A Call for Clarity and a Review of the Empirical Evidence: Comment on Felman and Turner's ‘Why Not NIMBY?’

Ethics, Policy and Environment 13 (3):313-316 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This response contributes to Feldman and Turner's interesting discussion in two ways: firstly, it provides some clarity on the definition of the term ‘NIMBY’; and, secondly, it incorporates some of...

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

How should philosophy be clear? Loaded clarity, default clarity, and Adorno.Nicholas Joll - 2009 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 2009 (146):73–95.
Clarity and the grammar of skepticism.Chris Barker - 2009 - Mind and Language 24 (3):253-273.
Observation: An Empirical Discussion.Daniel Gilman - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:355 - 364.
Are empirical evidence claims a priori?Peter Achinstein - 1995 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (4):447-473.
Comment by James Turner Johnson.James Turner Johnson - 2000 - Journal of Religious Ethics 28 (2):331-335.
Comment by James Turner Johnson.David Baggett - 2001 - Journal of Religious Ethics 29 (3):507-511.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-15

Downloads
12 (#1,058,801)

6 months
1 (#1,510,037)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Why Not NIMBY?Simon Feldman & Derek Turner - 2010 - Ethics, Place and Environment 13 (3):251-266.
Why Not NIMBY?Simon Feldman & Derek Turner - 2014 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 17 (1):105-115.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references