In Defense of a Dogma

N/A

Philosophical Review In Defense of a Dogma Author(s): H. P. Grice and P. F. Strawson Source: The Philosophical Review, Vol. 65, No. 2 (Apr., 1956), pp. 141-158 Published by: Duke University Press on behalf of Philosophical Review Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2182828 Accessed: 22/02/2010 22:41 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download…

related reading

• Two Dogmas of Empiricism - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• Quine, Willard Van Orman: Analytic/Synthetic Distinction | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophyiep.utm.edu
• ‘Two dogmas’ revisited (Chapter 5) - Philosophical Paperscambridge.org
• Analytic–synthetic distinction - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• The Analytic/Synthetic Distinction (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)plato.stanford.edu
• New riddle of induction - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• Willard Van Orman Quine - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• Beware Isolated Demands For Rigorslatestarcodex.com
• Pragmatism - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• Ludwig Wittgenstein (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)plato.stanford.edu
• I think Quine's "Two Dogmas of Empiricism" is very convincing. But I haven't read any serious papers that oppose him. Who are Quine's best critics? : r/askphilosophyreddit.com
• Proofs That Psubstack.com