The Generalisation Argument: A Reply to Mr. Braybrooke

Analysis 23 (5):113 - 115 (1963)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1093/analys/23.5.113

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,611

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

Parity still isn't a generalisation problem.R. I. Damper - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (2):307-308.
Reply to Braybrooke.Alvin I. Goldman - 1976 - Philosophical Studies 30 (4):273-275.
Reply to Braybrooke and de Sousa.Charles Taylor - 1994 - Dialogue 33 (1):125-.
Inequalities Not Conceded Yet: A Rejoinder to Gauthier's Reply.David Braybrooke - 1982 - Dialogue 21 (3):445-448.
Justice in Jeopardy if Needs Not Met: A Reply to Gillian Brock.David Braybrooke - 1998 - Dialogue 37 (4):799-.
Three separable tests: Reply to professors Ginsberg and Margolis.David Braybrooke - 1971 - World Futures 9 (1):140-147.
Justice and Needs.Gillian Brock - 1996 - Dialogue 35 (1):81-.
The case against distributed representations: Lack of evidence.Simon Farrell & Stephan Lewandowsky - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):476-477.
How (not) to attack the luck argument.E. J. Coffman - 2010 - Philosophical Explorations 13 (2):157-166.
What truth does the emotive-imperative answer to the open-question argument leave to moral judgments?David Braybrooke - 2003 - Journal of Value Inquiry 37 (3):341-352.
4. The Mutual Limitation of Needs as Bases of Moral Entitlements: A Solution to Braybrooke’s Problem.Duncan Macintosh - 2006 - In Susan Sherwin & Peter Schotch (eds.), Engaged Philosophy: Essays in Honour of David Braybrooke. University of Toronto Press. pp. 77-100.
Thinking without global generalisations: A cognitive defence of moral particularism.Nancy Salay - 2008 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 51 (4):390 – 411.
In defense of hard-line replies to the multiple-case manipulation argument.Daniel Haas - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 163 (3):797-811.
Reconsidering Bohr's reply to EPR.Hans Halvorson & Rob Clifton - 2001 - In T. Placek & J. Butterfield (eds.), Non-locality and Modality. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 3--18.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
50 (#320,996)

6 months
3 (#984,719)

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