- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Mistaking sensations
Philosophical Review 79 (April):201-213 (1970)
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
The electroencephalogram argument against incorrigibility.Gregory Sheridan - 1969 - American Philosophical Quarterly 6 (1):62-70.
Certainty about sensations.Joseph Margolis - 1964 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 25 (December):242-247.
Kinaesthetic sensations revisited.Howard L. Rolston - 1965 - Journal of Philosophy 62 (February):96-100.
The Austin-Malcolm argument for the incorrigibility of perceptual reports.Gerald Doppelt - 1979 - Dialectica 33 (1):59-75.
Incorrigibity and classification.John H. Chandler - 1970 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 48 (1):101-6.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
243 (#106,883)
6 months
10 (#379,980)
2009-01-28
Downloads
243 (#106,883)
6 months
10 (#379,980)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Is there a good argument against the incorrigibility thesis?Frank Jackson - 1973 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 51 (1):51-62.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-667477cd97-sfdq8 dc2