A Counterexample to the Breckenridge-Magidor Account of Instantial Reasoning

Journal of Philosophical Research 41:539-541 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In a recent paper, Breckenridge and Magidor argue for an interesting and counterintuitive account of instantial reasoning. According to this account, in arguments such as one beginning with 'There is some x such that x is mortal. Let O be such an x. ...', the 'O' refers to a particular object, although we cannot know which. I give and defend a simple counterexample involving the notion of an unreferred-to object.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Arbitrary reference.Wylie Breckenridge & Ofra Magidor - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 158 (3):377-400.
Simplicity as a Criterion of Induction.R. HarrÃĐ - 1959 - Philosophy 34 (130):229 - 234.
Laws and instantial statements.Alex Blum - 1970 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 21 (4):371-378.
Reasoning and logic.Jim Mackenzie - 1989 - Synthese 79 (1):99 - 117.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-10-09

Downloads
1,392 (#32,663)

6 months
113 (#87,311)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tristan GrÃļtvedt Haze
University of Melbourne

References found in this work

Arbitrary reference.Wylie Breckenridge & Ofra Magidor - 2012 - Philosophical Studies 158 (3):377-400.

Add more references