Otsuka, Michael and Voorhoeve, Alex (2011) Reply to Crisp. Utilitas, 23 (01). pp. 109-114. ISSN 0953-8208
We are grateful for, but unconvinced by, Roger Crisp's defence of the Priority View against our critique. In this reply, we show that Crisp fails to grapple with, much less defeat, the central claim of our critique. We also show that an example that Crisp offers in support of the Priority View in fact lends support to our critique of that view.
|Additional Information:||© 2011 Cambridge University Press|
|Library of Congress subject classification:||B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General)|
|Sets:||Departments > Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method|
|Date Deposited:||27 Jun 2011 10:32|
Actions (login required)
|Record administration - authorised staff only|