Why elementary propositions cannot be negative

Philosophical Studies 27 (6):433 - 435 (1975)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/bf01236463

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,809

External links

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

Negative elementary propositions.Robert J. Fogelin - 1974 - Philosophical Studies 25 (3):189 - 197.
Robert W. Burch, "A Peircean Reduction Thesis". [REVIEW]Jay Zeman - 1993 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 29 (1):101.
Robert W. Burch and Herman J. Saatkamp, eds., "Frontiers in American Philosophy". [REVIEW]George R. Lucas - 1995 - Journal of the History of Philosophy 33 (2):356.
Elementary Propositions and Independence.John L. Bell & William Demopoulos - 1996 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37 (1):112-124.
Language and Logic in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus.Daniele Mezzadri - 2013 - Nordic Wittgenstein Review 2 (1):57-80.
Wittgenstein's Elementary Propositions.William G. Bywater - 1969 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 50 (3):360.
Robert Burch and Massimo Verdicchio, eds., Between Philosophy and Poetry: Writing, Rhythm, History. [REVIEW]Victor Haines - 2004 - Philosophy in Review 24:170-172.
Criss-crossing a Philosophical Landscape.Michael V. Wedin - 1992 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 42 (1):23-55.
The semantics of falsity and negation.Luiz Pereira - 2004 - Manuscrito 27 (1):183-191.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
23 (#937,234)

6 months
5 (#1,035,700)

Historical graph of downloads
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