Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:32:13.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Another Look at the Problem of the Unexpected Examination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2010

Matthew H. Kramer
Matthew H. Kramer
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , Summer 1999 , pp. 491 - 502
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bennett, Jonathan 1965 “Review.” Journal of Symbolic Logic, 30: 101–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binkley, Robert 1968 “The Surprise Examination in Modal Logic.” Journal of Philosophy, 65: 127–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosch, Jorge 1972 “The Examination Paradox and Formal Prediction.” Logique et Analyse, 15: 505–25.Google Scholar
Jackson, Frank 1987 Conditionals. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Janaway, Christopher 1989 “Knowing about Surprises: A Supposed Antinomy Revisited.” Mind, 98: 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, David, and Montague, Richard 1960 “A Paradox Regained.” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 1: 79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkham, Richard 1991 “On Paradoxes and a Surprise Exam.” Philosophia, 21: 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon, Ardon 1959 “The Prediction Paradox.” Mind, 68: 510–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medlin, Brian 1964 “The Unexpected Examination.” American Philosophical Quarterly, 1: 66–72.Google Scholar
Nerlich, G. C. 1961 “Unexpected Examinations and Unprovable Statements.” Mind, 70: 503–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olin, Doris 1983 “The Prediction Paradox Resolved.” Philosophical Studies, 44: 225–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olin, Doris 1986 “The Prediction Paradox: Resolving Recalcitrant Variations.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 64: 181–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, W. V. 1953 “On a So-called Paradox.” Mind, 62: 65–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sainsbury, R. M. 1988 Paradoxes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stuart 1998 “A Procedural Solution to the Unexpected Hanging and Sorites Paradoxes” Mind, 107: 751–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, R. 1958 “The Paradox of the Unexpected Examination” Mind, 67: 382–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, Roy 1984 “Conditional Blindspots and the Knowledge Squeeze: A Solution to the Prediction Paradox.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 62: 126–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, Roy 1986a “Blindspotting and Choice Variations of the Prediction Paradox.” American Philosophical Quarterly, 23: 337–52.Google Scholar
Sorensen, Roy 1986b “A Strengthened Prediction Paradox.” Philosophical Quarterly, 36: 504–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, Roy 1988 Blindspots. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Weintraub, Ruth 1995 “Practical Solutions to the Surprise-Examination Paradox.” Ratio, 8: 161–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, Timothy 1992 “Inexact Knowledge.” Mind, 101: 217–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windt, Peter 1973 “The Liar in the Prediction Paradox.” American Philosophical Quarterly, 10: 65–68.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin, and Sudbury, Aidan 1977 “The Paradox of the Unexpected Examination.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 55: 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar