The pear proposition

In Kendrick Frazier (ed.), Science Under Siege: Defending Science, Exposing Pseudoscience. Prometheus. pp. 281 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,931

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The PEAR proposition.Robert G. Jahn & Brenda J. Dunne - 2005 - Journal of Scientific Exploration 19 (2):195–245.
Always more.Greg Restall - unknown
Propositional Profusion and the Liar.Cian Dorr - manuscript
New books. [REVIEW]T. H. Pear - 1922 - Mind 31 (122):213-217.
Notes.C. S. Myers & T. H. Pear - 1926 - Mind 35 (139):408-b-408.
Political Shirking – Proposition 13 vs. Proposition 8.Seiji Fujii - 2009 - Japanese Journal of Political Science 10 (2):213-237.
Obstacles to marriage.R. H. Pear - 1939 - The Eugenics Review 31 (3):161.
An Ontological Argument for Modal Realism.Michael Losonsky - 1988 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 31 (1):165-177.
International association for psychology.C. S. Myers & T. H. Pear - 1926 - Mind 35 (139):408.
The Multiple-Proposition Approach Reconsidered.Tadeusz Ciecierski - 2009 - Logique Et Analyse 52 (208):423-440.
The Positive Value of Evil.Jane Mary Trau - 1988 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 24 (1/2):21 - 33.
First-Person Propositions.Peter W. Hanks - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 86 (1):155-182.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-31

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
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