Results for 'Comments On Porn'S.'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  9
    Comments on Pörn's 'An Equilibrium Model of Health'.Lennart Nordenfelt - 1984 - In Lennart Nordenfelt & B. I. B. Lindahl (eds.), Health, Disease, and Causal Explanations in Medicine. Reidel. pp. 11--13.
  2. Lennart Nordenfelt.Comments On Porn'S. - 1984 - In Lennart Nordenfelt & B. I. B. Lindahl (eds.), Health, Disease, and Causal Explanations in Medicine. Reidel. pp. 11.
    No categories
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  6
    Comments on Sadegh-Zadeh's 'a Pragmatic Concept of Causal Explanation'.Ingmar Pörn - 1984 - In Lennart Nordenfelt & B. I. B. Lindahl (eds.), Health, Disease, and Causal Explanations in Medicine. Reidel. pp. 211--212.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  4.  8
    Comments on Rosenberg's Review.Elliott Sober - 1986 - Behavior and Philosophy 14 (1):89.
    Long ago, my undergraduate advisor counseled me against “replying to reviews.” Alexander Rosenberg cannot be blamed for tempting me to disregard this advice, since his review of my book, The Nature of Selection, is a generous one. However, the editors of this journal invited me to comment and this proved to be more temptation than I could withstand. In what follows, I take up some of the main themes that Rosenberg discusses and try to clarify those issues that divide us.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  5.  25
    Comments on Bond's Article.Alan Gewirth - 1980 - Metaphilosophy 11 (1):54–69.
  6. Comments on Gendler’s, “the Epistemic Costs of Implicit Bias”.Andy Egan - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 156 (1):65-79.
  7. Comments on Goodman's Ways of Worldmaking.Carl G. Hempel - 1980 - Synthese 45 (2):193 - 199.
  8. Comments on Stichter’s The Skillfulness of Virtue. [REVIEW]Mark Alfano - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (2):549-554.
  9.  19
    Comments on Stichter’s The Skillfulness of Virtue. [REVIEW]Mark Alfano - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (2):549-554.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  10.  30
    Comments on BEQ’s Twentieth Anniversary Forum on New Directions for Business Ethics Research.Andrew Crane, Dirk Ulrich Gilbert, Kenneth E. Goodpaster, Marcia P. Miceli & Geoff Moore - 2011 - Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (1):157-187.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  11. Comments on Merricks's Truth and Ontology.Ross P. Cameron - 2008 - Philosophical Books 49 (4):292-301.
    In his Truth and Ontology,1 Trenton Merricks argues against the truthmaker principle: Truthmaker: ∀p( p → ∃xxᮀ(Exx → p)). Truthmaker says that for any true proposition, there are some things whose existence guarantees the truth of that proposition: that is, some things which couldn’t all exist and the proposition fail to be true. His main arguments against Truthmaker are that there cannot be satisfactory truthmakers for (i) negative existentials, (ii) modal truths, (iii) truths about the past (given that presentism is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  12.  42
    Comment on Artiga’s “Teleosemantics and Pushmi-Pullyu Representations”.Ruth Garrett Millikan - forthcoming - Erkenntnis:1-9.
    “Teleosemantics and Pushmi-Pullyu Representations” argues that core teleosemantics, particularly as defined in Millikan :281–297, 1989, White queen psychology and other essays for Alice, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1993, Philosophical perspectives, Ridgeview Publishing, Alascadero, 1996, Varieties of meaning, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2004–2008), seems to imply that all descriptive representations are at the same time directive and that directives are at the same time descriptive, hence that all representations are pushmi-pullyu representations. A pushmi-pullyu representation is at once indicative and imperative, telling both what (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  18
    Comment on Healey’s “Quantum Theory and the Limits of Objectivity”.Veronika Baumann, Flavio Del Santo & Časlav Brukner - 2019 - Foundations of Physics 49 (7):741-749.
    In this comment we critically review an argument against the existence of objective physical outcomes, recently proposed by Healey [1]. We show that his gedankenexperiment, based on a combination of “Wigner’s friend” scenarios and Bell’s inequalities, suffers from the main criticism, that the computed correlation functions entering the Bell’s inequality are in principle experimentally inaccessible, and hence the author’s claim is in principle not testable. We discuss perspectives for fixing that by adapting the proposed protocol and show that this, however, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14.  35
    Comments on Pritchard’s Epistemological Disjunctivism.Sanford Goldberg - 2016 - Journal of Philosophical Research 41:183-191.
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  15.  83
    Comments on DeRose's “Single Scoreboard Semantics”.Richard Feldman - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):23-33.
  16. Comments on Epstein's Neurocognitive Interpretation of William James's Model of Consciousness.David Galin - 2000 - Consciousness and Cognition 9 (4):576-583.
  17.  17
    Comment on ‘What’s Special About “Not Feeling Like Oneself”?’.Marya Schechtman - 2022 - Philosophical Explorations 25 (3):290-293.
    This paper outlines a novel and exciting approach to topics of immense practical and theoretical significance. The overall strategy, offered as part of an ongoing research program, is powerful and...
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Comments on Sosa's “Relevant Alternatives, Contextualism Included”.James Pryor - 2004 - Philosophical Studies 119 (1-2):67-72.
    There is much I agree with in Sosa’s paper. His discussion of Stine and Peirce is quite useful; so too his discussion of Dretske in Appendix II. A further issue he focuses on concerns how Contextualists are to give full endorsement to the knowledge-claims of ordinary subjects. Just saying, metalinguistically, that.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  19.  1
    Comments on Rocknak's Imagined Causes.Donald L. M. Baxter - 2019 - Hume Studies 45 (1):51-58.
    Stefanie Rocknak has written an ambitious and challenging book1 in which she argues for a new interpretation of Hume's account of how we come to believe in external objects, and what it is we believe in. I am hampered by the fact that she and I seem to agree on so little. Thus, my criticisms run the danger of simply not seeing what she is up to.A preliminary terminological point: where Rocknak uses the word "object," I will often use the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. Comments on Nozick's Entitlement Theory.Lawrence Davis - 1976 - Journal of Philosophy 73 (21):836-844.
  21. Comments on Moore's Paradox and Self-Knowledge.Rogers Albritton - 1995 - Philosophical Studies 77 (2-3):229-239.
  22.  25
    Comments on Aristotle's Modal Syllogistic.Jonathan Beere - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 90 (3):742-747.
  23. Comments on ”Hempel’s Ambiguity’ by J. Alberto Coffa.Wesley C. Salmon - 1974 - Synthese 28 (2):165 - 169.
    Using Coffa's paper as a point of departure, this brief note is designed to show that Hempel's inductive-statistical model of explanation implicitly construes explanations of that type as defective deductive-nomological explanations, with the consequence that there is no such thing as genuine inductive-statistical explanation according to Hempel's account. This result suggests a possible implicit commitment to determinism behind Hempel's theory of scientific explanation.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  24.  36
    Comments on Martin’s and Welch’s Comments.Hartry Field - 2011 - Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (3):360-366.
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  25. Comment on Tapley's "What is Wrong With Being a Pervert?".David L. Hildebrand - 2009 - Southwest Philosophy Review 25 (2):51-56.
    Comment on Robin Tapley's paper on whether or not the sexual aspect of sexual harms adds anything to the harm done. I argue it does not based on the grounds Tapley provides.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  79
    Comments on Plantinga’s Two-Volume Work on Warrant.Carl Ginet - 1995 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 55 (2):403-408.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  27.  7
    Comments on Hesslow's 'What is a Genetic Disease?'.Henrik R. Wulff - 1984 - In Lennart Nordenfelt & B. I. B. Lindahl (eds.), Health, Disease, and Causal Explanations in Medicine. Reidel. pp. 195--197.
  28. Comments on Shimony’s “An Analysis of Stapp’s ‘A Bell-Type Theorem Without Hidden Variables’ ”.Henry P. Stapp - 2006 - Foundations of Physics 36 (1):73-82.
    The hidden-variable theorems of Bell and followers depend upon an assumption, namely the hidden-variable assumption, that conflicts with the precepts of quantum philosophy. Hence from an orthodox quantum perspective those theorems entail no faster-than-light transfer of information. They merely reinforce the ban on hidden variables. The need for some sort of faster-than-light information transfer can be shown by using counterfactuals instead of hidden variables. Shimony’s criticism of that argument fails to take into account the distinction between no-faster-than-light connection in one (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  29. Comments on Sklar's "Barbour's Relationist Metric of Time".Oliver Pooley - 2004 - Chronos 6:77-86.
    Julian Barbour's approach to dynamics is reviewed. With a particular focus on questions of explanation and confirmation, the approach is contrasted with standard formulations of dynamics. This paper expands upon my commentary on Lawrence Sklar's paper at the Philosophy of Time Society meeting at the APA's Central Division meeting in Chicago, April 2004. Although a commentary, the current paper is comprehensible without reference to Sklar's paper.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  30.  73
    Comments on Fairbairn's Paper.S. H. Foulkes - 1956 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 7 (28):324-329.
  31.  11
    Comments on BEQ’s Twentieth Anniversary Forum on New Directions for Business Ethics Research.Andrew Crane, Dirk Ulrich Gilbert & Gary Weaver - 2011 - Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (1):23-44.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  32.  10
    Comments on Moravcsik's Paper.Chung-Ying Cheng - 1973 - In Jaakko Hintikka (ed.), Approaches to Natural Language. D. Reidel Publishing. pp. 286--288.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  33.  25
    Comments on Youpa’s “Spinoza’s Ethical Objectivism”.Saja Parvizian - manuscript
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34.  9
    Comments on Jensen's 'A Critique of Essentialism in Medicine'.Henrik R. Wulff - 1984 - In Lennart Nordenfelt & B. I. B. Lindahl (eds.), Health, Disease, and Causal Explanations in Medicine. Reidel. pp. 75--76.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Comments on 'Hume's Master Argument'.Charles Pigden - 2010 - In Hume on Is and Ought. Palgrave-Macmillan. pp. 128-142.
    This is a commentary on Adrian Heathcote’s interesting paper ‘Hume’s Master Argument’. Heathcote contends that No-Ought-From-Is is primarily a logical thesis, a ban on Is/Ought inferences which Hume derives from the logic of Ockham. NOFI is thus a variation on what Heathcote calls ‘Hume’s Master Argument’, which he also deploys to prove that conclusions about the future (and therefore a-temporal generalizations) cannot be derived by reason from premises about the past, and that conclusions about external objects or other minds cannot (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  36.  8
    Comment on Schafer's Review of Chinese Thought and Institutions.Arthur F. Wright - 1958 - Journal of the American Oriental Society 78 (4):302-303.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  16
    "Comments on Salmon's" Inductive Evidence".Henry E. Kyburg - 1965 - American Philosophical Quarterly 2 (4):274-276.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  38.  2
    Comments on Green’s “Metacognition as an Epistemic Virtue”.Todd M. Stewart - 2019 - Southwest Philosophy Review 35 (2):21-22.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39.  29
    Comments on Pryor's “Externalism About Content and McKinsey-Style Reasoning”.William S. Larkin - unknown
    I. Pryor on McKinsey: " A. Pryor’s Version of McKinsey-style Reasoning 1. Given authoritative self-knowledge, I can usually tell the contents of my own thoughts just by introspection. So I can know the following claim on the basis of reflection alone: " McK-1: I am thinking a thought with the content _water puts out fires_.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. Comments on Shiffer's «Remnants of Meaning».Mark Richard & S. Schiffer - 1990 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 71 (3):223-245.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41.  6
    Comments on Moravcsik's Paper.Richard Montague - 1973 - In Jaakko Hintikka (ed.), Approaches to Natural Language. D. Reidel Publishing. pp. 289--294.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  42.  42
    Comments on Farr's Paper (II) Some Critical Remarks on Popper's Hermeneutics.Karl-Otto Apel - 1983 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 13 (2):183-193.
  43.  42
    Comments on Flanner's "Force and Compulsion in Aristotle's Ethics".Thornton Lockwood - 2007 - Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium of Ancient Philosophy 22:61-66.
    Aristotle’s notion of force seems to be the same as what we mean by “brute force,” or as an example of the Eudemian Ethics puts it, one is “forced” when one’s hand is literally seized by another and used to strike another person. But closer scrutiny suggests something else must be going on if for no other reason than that Aristotle, in his description of force, makes reference to a do-er (o( pra/ttwn [EN III.1.1110a2]). Based on such an insight, Flannery’s (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44.  31
    Comments on Cushing's Essay.K. S. Shrader-Frechette - 1982 - Synthese 50 (1):103 - 108.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  60
    Comment on Hollan’s “Emerging Issues in the Cross-Cultural Study of Empathy”.Eva-Maria Düringer & Sabine A. Döring - 2012 - Emotion Review 4 (1):79-80.
    In this comment we take up two points made by Douglas Hollan in his article “Emerging Issues in the Cross-Cultural Study of Empathy,” and discuss their possible philosophical implications. Hollan‘s concept of complex empathy may give rise to the idea that we can learn about other people’s beliefs via empathy, which is something we do not believe is possible. Furthermore, Hollan’s description of possible negative effects of empathy, such as manipulations of a person on the basis of knowledge about their (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46.  43
    Comments on Nietzsche’s Constructivism by Justin Remhof. [REVIEW]Neil Sinhababu - 2021 - Philosophia 49 (2):565-570.
    Justin Remhof defends a constructivist interpretation of Nietzsche’s view regarding the metaphysics of material objects. First, I describe an attractive feature of Remhof’s interpretation. Since Nietzsche seems to be a constructivist about whatever sort of value he accepts, a constructivist account of objects would fit into a nicely unified overall metaphysical theory. Second, I explore various options for developing the constructivist view of objects. Depending on how Nietzsche understood concepts, and whose concepts he saw as giving rise to objects, he (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47.  20
    Comments on BEQ’s Twentieth Anniversary Forum on New Directions for Business Ethics Research.Scott J. Reynolds - 2011 - Business Ethics Quarterly 21 (1):157-187.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  48. Comments on Zipf's Law and the Structures and Evolution of Natural Language.W. Li - 1998 - Complexity 3 (5):9-10.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  49. Comment on Kuhn's "Commensurability, Comparability, Communicability".Mary Hesse - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:704-711.
    Kuhn 's incommensurability thesis of 1962 still implies a very radical critique of standard theories of meaning. It is argued that incommensurability is sufficiently pervasive throughout the development of theories as to call in question standard linguistic palliatives, and that Kuhn 's critique of extensionalist translation must be carried further into a theory of interpretation which not only depends on holistic meanings, but also explicitly addresses the ostensive and analogical processes of language learning. Such a theory is required for the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  50. Comment on Norsen's Defense of Einstein's “Box Argument'.Abner Shimony - 2005 - American Journal of Physics 73:177--178.
1 — 50 / 1000