What could turn out, actually speaking

Philosophical Studies 105 (3):211-236 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this paper I distinguish three senses of could turn out/couldhave turned out in an attempt to elucidate how each is connected tothe notion of discovery and how each determines that a statement ofthe form `X could turn out P' (`X could have turned out P') is true.I argue that the actuality-oriented sense of could turn outbest captures what we ordinarily mean when we use could turnout or could have turned out in a nonevidential sense.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,466

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

Turn, Turn, Turn: Reply to Cotkin.Lewis Perry - 2008 - Journal of the History of Ideas 69 (2):333-337.
Past the Linguistic Turn?Timothy Williamson - 2004 - In Brian Leiter (ed.), The Future for Philosophy. Clarendon Press.
Semanticity: Which Way to Turn?Andrew Sneddon - 2002 - Philosophia 29 (1-4):211-239.
God or the Subject? Karl Barth's Critique of the “Turn to the Subject”.ProfDr Dirk-Martin Grube - 2008 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 49 (3).
Some Twists in the Cognitive Turn.Steve Fuller - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:445 - 448.


Added to PP

38 (#304,708)

6 months
1 (#417,474)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references