Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 118, Issue 1–2, pp 153–226 | Cite as

Epistemic Two-Dimensional Semantics

  • David J. Chalmers
Article

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bealer, G. (1996): ‘A priori Knowledge and the Scope of Philosophy’, Philosophical Studies 81, 121–142.Google Scholar
  2. Block, N. (1991): ‘What Narrow Content is Not’, in B. Loewer and G. Rey (eds.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and his Critics, Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Block, N. and Stalnaker, R. (1999): ‘Conceptual Analysis, Dualism, and the Explanatory Gap’, Philosophical Review 108, 1–46.Google Scholar
  4. Byrne, A. and Pryor, J. (2004): ‘Bad Intensions’, in M. Garcia-Carpintero and J. Macia (eds.), Two-Dimensional Semantics: Foundations and Applications, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Carnap, R. (1947): Meaning and Necessity, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  6. Carnap, R. (1963): ‘Replies and Systematic Expositions’, in P. Schilpp (ed.), The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap, Open Court.Google Scholar
  7. Chalmers, D.J. (1995): ‘The Components of Content (1995 version)’, Manuscript (revised as Chalmers, 2002c) [consc.net/papers/content95.html].Google Scholar
  8. Chalmers, D.J. (1996): The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Chalmers, D.J. (1998): ‘The Tyranny of the Subjunctive’ [consc.net/papers/tyranny.html].Google Scholar
  10. Chalmers, D.J. (1999): ‘Materialism and the Metaphysics of Modality’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research [consc.net/papers/modality.html].Google Scholar
  11. Chalmers, D.J. (2002a): ‘Does Conceivability Entail Possibility’, in T. Gendler and J. Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford University Press [consc.net/papers/conceivability.html].Google Scholar
  12. Chalmers, D.J. (2002b): ‘On Sense and Intension’ [consc.net/papers/intension.html].Google Scholar
  13. Chalmers, D.J. (2002c): ‘The Components of Content (revised version)’, Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings [consc.net/papers/content.html].Google Scholar
  14. Chalmers, D.J. (2003): ‘Consciousness and Its Place in Nature’, in S. Stich and F. Warfield (eds.), Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind, Blackwell [consc.net/papers/nature.html].Google Scholar
  15. Chalmers, D.J. (2004): ‘The Foundations of Two-Dimensional Semantics’, in M. Garcia-Carpintero and J. Macia (eds.), Two-Dimensional Semantics: Foundations and Applications, Oxford University Press [consc.net/papers/foundations.html].Google Scholar
  16. Chalmers, D.J. (forthcoming): ‘The Nature of Epistemic Space’ [consc.net/papers/espace.html].Google Scholar
  17. Chalmers, D.J. and Jackson, F. (2001): ‘Conceptual Analysis and Reductive Explanation’, Philosophical Review 110, 315–361 [consc.net/papers/analysis.html].Google Scholar
  18. Davies, M. and Humberstone, I.L. (1981): ‘Two Notions of Necessity’, Philosophical Studies 58, 1–30.Google Scholar
  19. Davies, M. (2004): ‘Reference, Contingency, and the Two-Dimensional Framework’, Philosophical Studies (this volume).Google Scholar
  20. Dennett, D.C. (1982): ‘Beyond belief’, in A. Woodfield (ed.), Thought and Object, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Evans, G. (1977): ‘Reference and Contingency’, The Monist 62, 161–189.Google Scholar
  22. Frege, G. (1892): ‘Über Sinn und Bedeutung’, translated in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.), Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Oxford: Blackwell, 1952.Google Scholar
  23. Jackson F. (1998): From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defense of Conceptual Analysis, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kaplan, D. (1978): ‘Dthat’, in P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kaplan, D. (1989): ‘Demonstratives’, in J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds.), Themes from Kaplan, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kripke, S.A. (1980): Naming and Necessity, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lewis (1944): ‘The Modes of Meaning’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 4, 236–250.Google Scholar
  28. Putnam, H. (1975): ‘The Meaning of “meaning”’, in K. Gunderson (ed.), Language, Mind, and Knowledge, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  29. Schroeter, L. (2004): ‘The Rationalist Foundations of Chalmers’ Two-Dimensional Semantics', Philosophical Studies.Google Scholar
  30. Soames, S. (2002): Beyond Rigidity: The Unfinished Semantic Agenda of Naming and Necessity, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Soames, S. (2004): Reference and Description, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Stalnaker, R. (1978): ‘Assertion’, in P. Cole, (ed.) Syntax and Semantics: Pragmatics, Vol. 9, New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  33. Stalnaker, R. (1990): ‘Narrow Content’, in C.A. Anderson and J. Owens (eds.), Propositional Attitudes, Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
  34. Stalnaker, R. (1991): ‘How to do Semantics for the Language of Thought’, in B. Loewer and G. Rey (eds.), Meaning in Mind: Fodor and His Critics, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  35. Stalnaker (1999): Content and Context (foreword). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Weatherson, B. (2001): ‘Indicatives and Subjunctives’, Philosophical Quarterly 51, 200–216.Google Scholar
  37. Yablo, S. (1999): ‘Concepts and Consciousness’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 59, 455–463.Google Scholar
  38. Yablo, S. (2002): ‘Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda’, in T. Gendler and J. Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • David J. Chalmers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA

Personalised recommendations