Response to Goldstein

Analysis 72 (4):742-744 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In ‘The Sorites is disguised nonsense’ Analysis (2012) 77: 61–5 L Goldstein attempts to show that some of the conditionals in any Sorites argument are nonsensical, and hence no Sorites argument can be sound. I give four reasons why this is not the case

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,865

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

Strict Finitism and the Happy Sorites.Ofra Magidor - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):471-491.
Deconstructing a Topological Sorites.D. Rizza - 2013 - Philosophia Mathematica 21 (3):361-364.
A note on Grim's sorites argument.W. R. Abbott - 1983 - Analysis 43 (4):161-164.
A cognitive neuroscience, dual-systems approach to the sorites paradox.Leib Litman & Mark Zelcer - 2013 - Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 25 (3):355-366.
What Williamson's anti-luminosity argument really is.Wai-Hung Wong - 2008 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (4):536-543.
Consonance and Dissonance in Solutions to the Sorites.Nicholas J. J. Smith - forthcoming - In Otavio Bueno & Ali Abasnezhad (eds.), On the Sorites Paradox. Springer.
Defeasible Tolerance and the Sorites.Ivan Hu - 2020 - Journal of Philosophy 117 (4):181-218.
Diagnosing Sorites arguments.Robert Stalnaker - 2018 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 33 (3):509-520.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-08-21

Downloads
131 (#167,629)

6 months
14 (#225,286)

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

No references found.

Add more references