Titlebook: Infinite Regress Arguments; Claude Gratton Book 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009 David Hume.Plato.benign regress.empirical l

Spangle

Radiculopathy

FOLD

factivity problem, have to be rephrased to account for the contextualist understanding of the semantics of “know”. It could be wondered, therefore, if other principles that might tacitly play a role in the argument of the conundrum need a similar treatment. In this chapter we will try to reply to t

溫和女人

FAWN

Viciousness,ned in the first chapter, a result is . if either it is a false statement, or it conflicts with a statement or rule that we are unwilling to abandon. The following diagram, presented in the first chapter, helps us to locate the subordinate argument.

歡樂中國

Circular Definitions, Circular Explanations, and Infinite Regresses, and circular explanations. For some philosophers believe that circular definitions and circular explanations entail infinite regresses (Sanford, 1984: 94; Day, 1986: 97; Moore, 1962: 109; Rankin, 1981: 335). For example, here is Russell’s (1996:348–349) view on circular definition.

不發(fā)音

機制

forecast

1566-7650 emises.Identifies different kinds of infinite regress argume.Infinite regress arguments. are part of a philosopher‘s tool kit of argumentation. But how sharp or strong is this tool? How effectively is it used? The typical presentation of infinite regress arguments throughout history is so succinct a

寡頭政治

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3341-3David Hume; Plato; benign regress; empirical logic; formal logic; infinite regress; logic; philosophy; reaso