Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-30T02:46:56.701Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unrecognized Particulars: A Reply to Mr. Barber

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1967

John Trentman
John Trentman
Affiliation:
Huron College, University of Western Ontario
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mr Barber has admirably understood what he calls my first argument. Unfortunately, he thinks it does not succeed in demonstrating that the phenomenological argument Jbr the existence of bare particulars is circular. Or, rather, he thinks t he phenomeno-logical argument need not be taken in the way I suggested but can be put so that my argument will not apply to it. His attempted phenomenological rejuvenation of the putative acquaintance with bare particulars will not do. Indeed, it can be used to illustrate one of the points I tried to make in my original paper.

Type
Discussions/Notes
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , March 1967 , pp. 584 - 585
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1967

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.)