Quine's criticism of the “First dogma of empiricism”

Logic and Logical Philosophy 13:5-30 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Quine’s argumentation is shown to be invalid since its conclusion would need one premise more; such a premise is shown to be false

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.12775/llp.2004.001

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

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

Yet Another Dogma of Empiricism.Saul Kripke - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (2):381-385.
"No Entity Without Identity".Dirk Greimann - 2000 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 60 (1):13-29.
Distinguishing WV Quine and Donald Davidson.James Pearson - 2011 - Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 1 (1):1-22.
Every dogma has its day.Richard Creath - 1991 - Erkenntnis 35 (1-3):347-389.
On Quine on Carnap on Ontology.Marc Alspector-Kelly - 2001 - Philosophical Studies 102 (1):93-122.
Quine’s Naturalized Epistemology and the Third Dogma of Empiricism.Robert Sinclair - 2007 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):455-472.
Are dinosaurs extinct?Richard Creath - 1995 - Foundations of Science 1 (2):285-297.
Gonseth and Quine.Michael Esfeld - 2001 - Dialectica 55 (3):199–219.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
116 (#410,156)

6 months
2 (#1,984,858)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Once more on analytic vs. synthetic.Pavel Materna - 2007 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 16 (1):3-43.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Word and Object.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1960 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 17 (2):278-279.
From a Logical Point of View.Willard Orman Quine - 1953 - Harvard University Press.

Add more references