On miller's paradoxes and circles

Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 17 (1-4):461-464 (1974)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper, 1 reply to A. R. Miller's ?Correct vs. ?Merely True? Act?Descriptions? (this issue). I explain that my distinction between true and correct descriptions of human behavior does not turn on the notion of an ?unbound action?, and hence is not circular in the way Miller suggests. I also discuss his claim that the way I have drawn the distinction leads to ?certain unacceptable consequences for action theory?

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,667

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Correct vs. 'merely true' act‐descriptions.Arthur R. Miller - 1974 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 17 (1-4):457-460.
Can a single action have many different descriptions?Arthur B. Cody - 1967 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 10 (1-4):164 – 180.
On describing actions.David Rayfield - 1970 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 13 (1-4):90 – 99.
Is Miller's Minimalist Approach to Human Rights Obligations Coherent?John Pearson - 2011 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 58 (129):35-57.
Consequences and Privileged Act Descriptions.Patricia Mary Lourdes Illingworth - 1985 - Dissertation, University of California, Irvine
Reference and Descriptions.William Kim Blackburn - 1986 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-10

Downloads
14 (#1,283,901)

6 months
7 (#728,225)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references