Does the classical principle of bivalence hold? (Charles Travis versus Timothy Williamson.)

Litera (Russian E-Journal) (3):60-128 (2014)
  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: 101,757

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

Can one get bivalence from (tarskian) truth and falsity?Dan López de Sa - 2009 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (2):pp. 273-282.
On 'the denial of bivalence is absurd'.F. J. Pelletier & R. J. Stainton - 2003 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (3):369 – 382.
Pragmatism and bivalence.Cheryl Misak - 1990 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (2):171 – 179.
Williamson on Bivalence.Miroslava Andjelkovic - 1999 - Acta Analytica 14 (1).
Discussions: Vagueness and Bivalence: A Discussion of Williamson and Simons.B. J. Copeland - 1995 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95 (1):193-200.
Knowledge, evidence, and skepticism according to Williamson. [REVIEW]Anthony Brueckner - 2005 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 70 (2):436–443.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-03-27

Downloads
4 (#1,807,317)

6 months
4 (#1,269,568)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references