Reply to "What Is the Goal of Proof?" by Aaron Lercher

Logique Et Analyse 45 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,607

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Proof, Cognition, and Rationality.Ron Rood - 2002 - Logique Et Analyse 45.
Lakatos on proof and on mathematics.J. Agassi - 1981 - Logique Et Analyse 24 (95):437.
A reply to T.M. Simpson.J. Cohen - 1975 - Logique Et Analyse 18 (69):209.
Aristotle on the Centrality of Proof to Rhetoric.Jamie Dow - 2010 - Logique Et Analyse 53 (210):101--130.
The proof theory of comparative logic.F. Paoli - 2000 - Logique Et Analyse 171:357-370.
A Further Note on a Proof by Sommers.G. Englebretsen - 1981 - Logique Et Analyse 94 (94):271-72.
On strongly creative definitions: A reply.V. F. Rickey - 1977 - Logique Et Analyse 20 (77):111.
Locke on Particles: a Reply to Nuchelmans.David Berman & Timothy Williamson - 1988 - Logique Et Analyse 31 (123-124):213-218.
Hilbert Programme and Applied Proof Theory.Yvon Gauthier - 2011 - Logique Et Analyse 54 (213):49.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-06

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Don Fallis
Northeastern University

Citations of this work

Mathematical instrumentalism, Gödel’s theorem, and inductive evidence.Alexander Paseau - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (1):140-149.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references