Otsuka, Michael and Voorhoeve, Alex (2011) Reply to Crisp. Utilitas, 23 (1). pp. 109-114. ISSN 0953-8208
Abstract
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.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Official URL: | http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJourna... |
| Additional Information: | © 2011 Cambridge University Press |
| Library of Congress subject classification: | B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > B Philosophy (General) B Philosophy. Psychology. Religion > BJ Ethics J Political Science > JC Political theory |
| Sets: | Departments > Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method |
| Date Deposited: | 07 Nov 2013 10:34 |
| URL: | http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/54182/ |
Actions (login required)
 |
Record administration - authorised staff only |
