Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T03:55:27.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

References

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 March 2013

Søren Overgaard
Affiliation:
University of Copenhagen
Paul Gilbert
Affiliation:
University of Hull
Stephen Burwood
Affiliation:
University of Hull
Get access

Summary

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

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

Ambrose, A. 1992. ‘Linguistic Approaches to Philosophical Problems’, in R. Rorty (ed.) 1992a, pp. 147–55.
Apel, K.-O. 2001. ‘What Is Philosophy?’, in Ragland and Heidt (eds.), pp. 153–82.
Aristotle, . 1976. The Nicomachean Ethics, trans. Thomson, J. A. K. and Tredennick, H.. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Aristotle, 1984. ‘Metaphysics’, trans. Ross, W. D.. In Barnes, J. (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle, Vol. ii. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Arrington, R. L. and Glock, H.-J. (eds.). 1996. Wittgenstein and Quine. London: Routledge.CrossRef
Augustine, . 1961. Confessions, trans. Pine-Coffin, R. S.. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1962. Sense and Sensibilia, ed. Warnock, G. J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1979. Philosophical Papers, ed. Urmson, J. O. and Warnock, G. J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayer, A. J. 1949. ‘Science and Philosophy’, in Ideas and Beliefs of the Victorians. London: Sylvan Press, pp. 205–14.Google Scholar
Ayer, A. J. 1969. Metaphysics and Common Sense. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayer, A. J. 1984. Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. London: Unwin Paperbacks.Google Scholar
Babich, B. 2003. ‘On the Analytic-Continental Divide in Philosophy: Nietzsche’s Lying Truth, Heidegger’s Speaking Language, and Philosophy’, in Prado (ed.) 2003a, pp. 63–103.
Baker, G. 2003. Wittgenstein’s Method. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Baker, L. R. 2007. ‘Naturalism and the First-person Perspective’, in Gasser, G. (ed.), How Successful is Naturalism?Heusenstamm: Ontos Verlag, pp. 203–26.Google Scholar
Barnard, F. M. (ed.) 1969. J. G. Herder on Social and Political Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bealer, G. 1998. ‘Intuition and the Autonomy of Philosophy’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 201–39.
Beaney, M. (ed.) 2007. The Analytic Turn: Analysis in Early Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology. New York: Routledge.
Beaney, M. 2009. ‘Analysis’, in E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: .
Bennett, M. R. and Hacker, P. M. S. 2003. Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Biletzki, A. 2001. ‘Introduction: Bridging the Analytic-Continental Divide’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9: 291–4.CrossRef
Bix, B. 2003. ‘Raz on Necessity’, Law and Philosophy 22: 537–59.
Blackburn, S. 2004. ‘Foreword’, in Carel, H. and Gamez, D. (eds.), What Philosophy Is. London: Continuum, pp. xiii–xviii.Google Scholar
Boer, T. de 1986. ‘An Ethical Transcendental Philosophy’, in Cohen, R. A. (ed.), Face to Face with Levinas. Albany, NY: SUNY Press, pp. 83–115.
Bontempo, C. J. and Odell, S. J. (eds.) 1975. The Owl of Minerva: Philosophers on Philosophy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Botton, A. de 2000. The Consolations of Philosophy. London: Hamish Hamilton.Google Scholar
Boulter, S. 2007. The Rediscovery of Common Sense Philosophy. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouveresse, J. 2000. ‘Reading Rorty: Pragmatism and Its Consequences’, in Brandom (ed.) 2000a, pp. 129–45.
Bowie, A. 2003. Introduction to German Philosophy. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, R. B. (ed.) 2000a. Rorty and His Critics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Brandom, R. B. 2000b. ‘Vocabularies of Pragmatism: Synthesizing Naturalism and Historicism’, in Brandom (ed.) 2000a, Rorty and His Critics, pp. 156–82.
Brandom, R. B. 2002. Tales of the Mighty Dead: Historical Essays in the Metaphysics of Intentionality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Braver, L. 2011. ‘Analyzing Heidegger: A History of Analytic Reactions to Heidegger’, in Dahlstrom, D. O. (ed.), Interpreting Heidegger: Critical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 235–55.Google Scholar
Brennan, J. 2008. ‘Beyond the Bottom Line’, Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 28: 277–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broad, C. D. 1927. Scientific Thought. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1959. ‘The Elimination of Metaphysics through Logical Analysis of Language’, trans. A. Pap, in Ayer, A. J. (ed.), Logical Positivism. London: George Allen and Unwin, pp. 60–81.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1967. The Logical Structure of the World, trans. George, R. A.. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. 1992. ‘On the Character of Philosophic Problems’, in R. Rorty (ed.) 1992a, pp. 54–62.
Carr, D. 1999. The Paradox of Subjectivity: The Self in the Transcendental Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cassin, B. 2000. ‘Who’s afraid of the Sophists?’, Hypatia 15: 102–20.Google Scholar
Cavell, S. 1979. The Claim of Reason. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cavell, S. 1988. In Quest of the Ordinary. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Cavell, S. 2002. Must We Mean What We Say? A Book of Essays, updated edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cerbone, D. R. 2003. ‘Phenomenology: Straight and Hetero’, in Prado (ed.) 2003a, pp. 105–38.
Chase, J. and Reynolds, J. 2011. Analytic versus Continental: Arguments on the Methods and Value of Philosophy. Durham: Acumen.Google Scholar
Churchland, P. M. 2008. ‘Eliminative Materialism and the Propositional Attitudes’, in Lycan, W. G. and Prinz, J. J. (eds.), Mind and Cognition: An Anthology, 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 231–44.Google Scholar
Cobb-Stevens, R. 1990. Husserl and Analytic Philosophy. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cockburn, D. 2001. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Code, L. 1987. Epistemic Responsibility. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
Cooper, D. E. 1994. ‘Analytic and Continental Philosophy’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 94: 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, D. E. 2009. ‘Visions of Philosophy’, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 65: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crane, T. 2006. ‘Is There a Perceptual Relation?’, in Gendler, T. S. and Hawthorne, J. (eds.), Perceptual Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 126–46.Google Scholar
Crary, A. and Read, R. (eds.) 2000. The New Wittgenstein. London: Routledge.CrossRef
Critchley, S. 2001. Continental Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummins, R. 1998. ‘Reflection on Reflective Equilibrium’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 113–27.
Dancy, J. 2004. Ethics Without Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1994. What Is Philosophy?, trans. Tomlinson, H. and Burchill, G.. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 1991. Consciousness Explained. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 2003. ‘Who’s On First? Heterophenomenology Explained’, Journal of Consciousness Studies 10 (9–10): 19–30.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. 2006. ‘Higher Order Truths about Chmess’, Topoi 25: 39–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DePaul, M. R. 1998. ‘Why Bother with Reflective Equilibrium?’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 293–309.
DePaul, M. R. and Ramsey, W. (eds.) 1998. Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Derrida, J. 1982. ‘White Mythology’, in his Margins of Philosophy. Chicago: Chicago University Press, pp. 207–71.Google Scholar
Derrida, J., Moore, A. W. et al. 2000. ‘Discussion’, Ratio 13: 373–86.Google Scholar
Descartes, R. 1985. The Philosophical writings of Descartes, Volume 1, trans. Cottingham, J. et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, C. 1996. ‘Wittgenstein, Mathematics and Ethics’, in Sluga, H. and Stern, D. G. (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Wittgenstein. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 226–60.Google Scholar
Dietrich, E. 2011. ‘There Is No Progress in Philosophy’, Essays in Philosophy 12: 329–44. Available at: .Google Scholar
Dilthey, W. 1976. Selected Writings, trans. Rickman, H.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. 1978. ‘Can Analytic Philosophy be Systematic and Ought it to Be?’, in his Truth and Other Enigmas. London: Duckworth, pp. 437–58.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. 1993. Origins of Analytical Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Dummett, M. 2010. The Nature and Future of Philosophy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Eddington, A. S. 1928. The Nature of the Physical World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Feynman, R. 1986. ‘Appendix F: Personal Observations on the Reliability of the Shuttle’, Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, Volume ii. Washington DC: Presidential Commission. Available at: .Google Scholar
Foley, R. 1998. ‘Rationality and Intellectual Self-Trust’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 241–56.
Føllesdal, D. 1996. ‘Analytic Philosophy: What Is It, and Why Should One Engage in It?’, Ratio 9: 193–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. 2000. A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer, and Heidegger. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H.-G. 1976. Philosophical Hermeneutics, trans. and ed. Linge, David E.. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Gadamer, H.-G. 1989. Truth and Method, 2nd rev. edn, trans. Weinsheimer, J. and Marshall, D. G.. London: Sheed and Ward.Google Scholar
Gallagher, S. and Zahavi, D. 2008. The Phenomenological Mind. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garver, N. 1973. ‘Preface’, in Derrida, J., Speech and Phenomena and Other Essays on Husserl’s Theory of Signs, trans. Allison, D. B.. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, pp. ix–xxix.Google Scholar
Gettier, E. L. 1963. ‘Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?’, Analysis 23: 121–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, P. and Lennon, K. 2005. The World, the Flesh and the Subject: Continental Themes in the Philosophy of Mind and Body. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Glendinning, S. 2006. The Idea of Continental Philosophy, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glock, H.-J. 2004. ‘Was Wittgenstein an Analytic Philosopher?’, Metaphilosophy 35: 419–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glock, H.-J. 2008. What is Analytic Philosophy?Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, A. and Pust, J. 1998. ‘Philosophical Theory and Intuitional Evidence’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 179–97.
Grayling, A. C. and Greenfield, S. 2010. ‘Is Hawking Right to Attack Philosophy?’ Today, BBC Radio 4, 8 September 2010.
Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Griswold, C. L. 2002. ‘Plato’s Metaphilosophy: Why Plato Wrote Dialogues’, in Griswold, C. L. (ed.), Platonic Writings / Platonic Readings. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, pp. 143–67.Google Scholar
Gutting, G. 1998. ‘“Rethinking Intuition”: A Historical and Metaphilosophical Introduction’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 3–13.
Gutting, G. 2009. What Philosophers Know: Case Studies in Recent Analytic Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. 1986. ‘Philosophy as Stand-in and interpreter’, in Baynes, K., Bohman, J. and McCarthy, T. (eds.), After Philosophy: End or Transformation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 296–316.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1990. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, trans. Lawrence, F.. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2006. ‘Levelling the Genre Distinction between Philosophy and Criticism’, in Thomassen, L. (ed.), The Derrida-Habermas Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 13–34.Google Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S. 1996. Wittgenstein’s Place in Twentieth-Century Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S. 1998. ‘Analytic Philosophy: What, Whence, and Whither?’, in Biletzki, A. and Matar, A. (eds.), The Story of Analytic Philosophy: Plot and Heroes. London: Routledge, pp. 3–34.Google Scholar
Hacker, P. M. S. 2009. ‘Philosophy: A Contribution, not to Human Knowledge, but to Human Understanding’, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 65: 129–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hagberg, G. 2007. ‘Wittgenstein’s Aesthetics’, in E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: .
Hampshire, S. 1975. ‘A Statement about Philosophy’, in Bontempo and Odell (eds.), pp. 89–101.
Hawking, S. and Mlodinow, L. 2010. The Grand Design. London: Bantam Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1962. Being and Time, trans. Macquarrie, J. and Robinson, E.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1971. Poetry, Language and Thought, trans. Hofstadter, A.. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1988. Basic Problems of Phenomenology, trans. Hofstadter, A.. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1993. ‘What Is Metaphysics?’, trans. D. F. Krell, in Heidegger, M., Basic Writings, ed. Krell, D. F.. New York: HarperCollins, pp. 93–110.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1995. Phänomenologie des religiösen Lebens, ed. Jung, M., Regehly, T. and Strube, C.. Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1996. Einleitung in die Philosophie, ed. Saame, O. and Same- Speidel, I.. Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
Himma, K. E. 2002. ‘Substance and Method in Conceptual Jurisprudence and Legal Theory’, Virginia Law Review 88: 1119–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobson, R. P. 2004. The Cradle of Thought: Exploring the Origins of Thinking. London: Pan Macmillan.Google Scholar
Holmes, R. 2008. The Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science. London: Harper Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1975. Enquiries concerning Human Understanding and concerning the Principles of Morals, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A. and Nidditch, P. H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hume, D. 1978. A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A. and Nidditch, P. H.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hursthouse, R. 1999. On Virtue Ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1959. Erste Philosophie (1923/24), Zweiter Teil, ed. Boehm, R.. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1965. ‘Philosophy as Rigorous Science’, in Phenomenology and the Crisis of Philosophy, trans. and ed. Lauer, Q.. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 71–147.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1970. The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, trans. Carr, D.. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1973. Experience and Judgment: Investigations in a Genealogy of Logic, trans. Churchill, J. S. and Ameriks, K.. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1982. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology, trans. Kersten, F.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Husserl, E. 1995. Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology, trans. Cairns, D.. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Jackson, F. 1998. From Metaphysics to Ethics: A Defence of Conceptual Analysis. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Johnstone, H. W. 1978. Validity and Rhetoric in Philosophical Argument. University Park, PA: Dialogue Press.Google Scholar
Joll, N. 2010. ‘Contemporary Metaphilosophy’, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at: .
Kant, I. 1929. Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Kemp Smith, N.. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kauppinen, A. 2007. ‘The Rise and Fall of Experimental Philosophy’, Philosophical Explorations 10: 95–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kekes, J. 1980. The Nature of Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kelly, S. D. 2008. Review of D. W. Smith’s Husserl, Times Literary Supplement, 25 April 2008.Google Scholar
Knobe, J. 2007. ‘Experimental Philosophy’, Philosophy Compass 2 (1): 81–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knobe, J. and Nichols, S. (eds.) 2008a. Experimental Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Knobe, J. and Nichols, S. 2008b. ‘An Experimental Philosophy Manifesto’, in Knobe and Nichols (eds.) 2008a, pp. 3–14.
Kornblith, H. 2006. ‘Appeals to Intuition and the Ambitions of Epistemology’, in Hetherington, S. (ed.), Epistemology Futures. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 10–25.Google Scholar
Kriegel, U. 2007. ‘The Phenomenologically Manifest’, in Noë (ed.), pp. 115–36.
Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
LaFollette, H. 2003. ‘Introduction’, in LaFollette, H. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Lang, B. 1990. The Anatomy of Philosophical Style. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lazerowitz, M. 1970. ‘A Note on “Metaphilosophy”’, Metaphilosophy 1: 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinas, E. 1998. Collected Philosophical Papers, trans. Lingis, A.. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, N. 2003. ‘Analytic and Continental Philosophy: Explaining the Differences’, Metaphilosophy 34: 284–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. 1983. Philosophical Papers, Volume 1. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. 1997. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Woolhouse, R.. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Lycan, W. G. 1996. ‘Bealer on the Possibility of Philosophical Knowledge’, Philosophical Studies 81: 143–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, A. 1990. Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Magee, B. 1982. Talking Philosophy: Dialogues with Fifteen Leading Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marx, K. 1969. ‘Theses on Feuerbach’, in Feuer, L. (ed.), Marx and Engels: Basic Writings on Politics and Philosophy. London: Collins, pp. 283–6.Google Scholar
McCulloch, G. 1995. The Mind and Its World. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. 1996. Mind and World, 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. 1998. Mind, Value and Reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McGinn, C. 1993. Problems in Philosophy: The Limits of Inquiry. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McGinn, C. 2002. The Making of a Philosopher. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Meisels, T. 2008. The Trouble with Terror. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1964a. The Visible and the Invisible, trans. Lingis, A.. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 1964b. The Primacy of Perception, ed. Edie, J. M., various trans. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2002. Phenomenology of Perception, trans. Smith, C.. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Misak, C. 2000. Truth, Politics, Morality. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G. E. 1953. Some Main Problems of Philosophy. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Moore, G. E. 1959. Philosophical Papers. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Moore, G. E. 1991. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Morrow, D. R. and Sula, C. A. 2011. ‘Naturalized Metaphilosophy’, Synthese 182: 297–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulligan, K. 1991. ‘Introduction: On the History of Continental Philosophy’, Topoi 10: 115–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulligan, K., Simons, P. and Smith, B. 2006. ‘What’s Wrong with Contemporary Philosophy?’, Topoi 25: 63–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadelhoffer, T. and Nahmias, E. 2007. ‘The Past and Future of Experimental Philosophy’, Philosophical Explorations 10: 123–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, E. 1955. ‘Naturalism Reconsidered’, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 28: 5–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, T. 1979. Mortal Questions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, T. 1986. The View from Nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Newman, J. H. 1947. The Idea of a University. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Nietzsche, F. 1990. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future, trans. Hollingdale, R. J.. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Noë, A. (ed.) 2007. ‘Special Issue on Dennett and Heterophenomenology’. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1–2): 1–270.
Norris, C. 1985. The Contest of Faculties. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Norris, C. 2011. ‘Hawking Contra Philosophy’, Philosophy Now 82: 21–4. Available at: .Google Scholar
Nozick, R. 1989. The Examined Life. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 1990. Love’s Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 1997. Cultivating Humanity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. 2010. Not for Profit. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, O. 2009. ‘Applied Ethics: Naturalism, Normativity and Public Policy’, Journal of Applied Philosophy 26: 219–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overgaard, S. 2010. ‘Royaumont Revisited’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18: 899–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padilla Gálvez, J. (ed.) 2010. Philosophical Anthropology: Wittgenstein’s Perspective. Heusenstamm: Ontos Verlag.CrossRef
Papineau, D. 2002. Thinking about Consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papineau, D. 2009. ‘The Poverty of Analysis’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 83: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passmore, J. 1961. Philosophical Reasoning. London: Gerald Duckworth.Google Scholar
Peacocke, C. 1991. ‘The Metaphysics of Concepts’, Mind 100: 525–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perloff, M. 2011. ‘Writing Philosophy as Poetry: Literary Form in Wittgenstein’, in Kuusela, O. and McGinn, M. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Wittgenstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 714–28.Google Scholar
Philipse, H. 2009. ‘Can Philosophy Be a Rigorous Science?’, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 65: 155–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plant, B. 2012. ‘This Strange Institution Called “Philosophy”: Derrida and the Primacy of Metaphilosophy’, Philosophy and Social Criticism. doi: 10.1177/0191453711430930.Google Scholar
Plato, . 1892. The Dialogues of Plato, trans Jowett, B., 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at: .Google Scholar
Plato, 1989. The Collected Dialogues, ed. Hamilton, E. and Cairns, H., various trans. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. 1968. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. 1975. ‘How I see Philosophy’, in Bontempo and Odell (eds.), pp. 41–55.
Posner, R. A. 1996. Law and Legal Theory in England and America. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Poulakos, J. 1983. ‘Towards a Sophistic Definition of Rhetoric’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 16: 35–48.Google Scholar
Prado, C. G. (ed.) 2003a. A House Divided: Comparing Analytic and Continental Philosophy. Amherst, NY: Humanity Books.Google Scholar
Prado, C. G. 2003b. ‘Introduction’, in Prado (ed.) 2003a, pp. 9–16.
Price, H. 2004. ‘Naturalism without Representationalism’, in De Caro, M. and Macarthur, D. (eds.), Naturalism in Question. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 71–88.Google Scholar
Priest, G. 2006. ‘What Is Philosophy?’, Philosophy 81: 189–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prinz, J. J. 2008. ‘Empirical Philosophy and Experimental Philosophy’, in Knobe and Nichols (eds.) 2008a, pp. 189–208.
Pust, J. 2001. ‘Against Explanationist Skepticism Regarding Philosophical Intuitions’, Philosophical Studies 106: 227–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. 1975. ‘The Meaning of “Meaning”’, in his Mind, Language, and Reality: Philosophical Papers, Volume 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 215–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. 1992. Renewing Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1997. Realism with a Human Face. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 2004. ‘The Content and Appeal of “Naturalism”’, in De Caro, M. and Macarthur, D. (eds.), Naturalism in Question. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 59–70.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1953. From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1969. ‘Epistemology Naturalized’, in his Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 69–90.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1975. ‘A Letter to Mr. Ostermann’. In Bontempo and Odell (eds.), pp. 227–30.
Quine, W. V. O. 1981. Theories and Things. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1995. From Stimulus to Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Quinton, A. 2005. ‘Continental Philosophy’, in Honderich, T. (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Oxford Reference Online.Google Scholar
Ragland, C. P. and Heidt, S. (eds.) 2001. What Is Philosophy?New Haven: Yale University Press.
Ratcliffe, M. 2007. Rethinking Commonsense Psychology: A Critique of Folk Psychology, Theory of Mind and Simulation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, T. 1969. Essays on the Intellectual Powers of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rescher, N. 2001. Philosophical Reasoning: A Study in the Methodology of Philosophizing. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Robinson, H. 1994. Perception. London: Routledge.Google ScholarPubMed
Rorty, R. 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1982. The Consequences of Pragmatism. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1989. Contingency, Irony and Solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, R. 1991a. Objectivity, Relativism and Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1991b. Essays on Heidegger and Others. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, R. (ed.) 1992a. The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Rorty, R. 1992b. ‘Introduction: Metaphilosophical Difficulties of Linguistic Philosophy’, in Rorty (ed.) 1992a, The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method, pp. 1–39.
Rorty, R. 1992c. ‘Twenty-five Years After’, in Rorty (ed.) 1992a, The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method, pp. 371–4.
Rorty, R. 1995. ‘Response to Hartshorne’, in Saatkamp, H. J. (ed.), Rorty and Pragmatism. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, pp. 29–36.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1996. ‘Something to Steer by’, London Review of Books 18 (12): 7–8.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1997. ‘What Do You Do When They Call You a Relativist?’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57: 173–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, R. 1998. ‘Pragmatism as Romantic Polytheism’, in Dickstein, M. (ed.) The Revival of Pragmatism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 1999. Philosophy and Social Hope. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2000a. ‘The Decline of Redemptive Truth and the Rise of a Literary Culture’. Available at: .
Rorty, R. 2000b. ‘Response to Bouveresse’, in Brandom (ed.) 2000a, pp. 146–55.
Rorty, R. 2003. ‘Analytic and Conversational Philosophy’, in Prado (ed.) 2003a, pp. 17–31.
Rorty, R. 2004. ‘Philosophy as a Transitional Genre’, in Benhabib, S. and Fraser, N. (eds.), Pragmatism, Critique, Judgement. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2006. ‘Habermas, Derrida and the Functions of Philosophy’, in Thomassen, L. (ed.), The Derrida-Habermas Reader. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 46–70.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. 2007. Philosophy as Cultural Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. 1956. Portraits from Memory and Other Essays. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1959. My Philosophical Development. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1998. The Problems of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 1949. The Concept of Mind. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 1956. ‘Introduction’, in Ayer, A. J. et al., The Revolution in Philosophy. London: Macmillan, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 1971. ‘Autobiographical’, in Wood, O. P. and Pitcher, G. (eds.), Ryle. London: Macmillan, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 2009a. Collected Papers, Volume 1: Critical Essays. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 2009b. Collected Papers, Volume 2: Collected Essays 1929–1968. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sacks, O. 1986. The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat. London: Picador.Google Scholar
Sandel, M. J. 2005. Public Philosophy: Essays on Morality and Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sandford, S. 2000. ‘Johnny Foreigner’, Radical philosophy 102 (July/August): 42–5.Google Scholar
Santas, G. 2001. Goodness and Justice. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sartre, J-P. 1966. Existentialism and Humanism, trans. Mairet, P.. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Schlick, M. 1992. ‘The Future of Philosophy’, in Rorty (ed.) 1992a, pp. 43–53.
Searle, J. 1983. Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. 1999. ‘The Future of Philosophy’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 354: 2069–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sellars, W. 1991. Science, Perception and Reality. Atascadero: Ridgeview.Google Scholar
Sesonske, A. 1968. ‘To Make the Weaker Argument Defeat the Stronger’, Journal of the History of Philosophy 6: 217–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewert, C. 2011. ‘Philosophy of Mind’, in Luft, S. and Overgaard, S. (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Phenomenology. London: Routledge, pp. 394–405.Google Scholar
Simons, P. 2001. ‘Whose Fault? The Origins and Evitability of the Analytic-Continental Rift’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9: 295–311.Google Scholar
Singer, P. 1972. ‘Moral Experts’, Analysis 32: 115–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skidelsky, E. 2000. Review of Allain de Botton’s The Consolations of Philosophy, The New Statesman, 27 March 2000.
Skilleås, O. M. 2001. Philosophy and Literature. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Smart, J. J. C. 1975. ‘My Semantic Ascents and Descents’, in Bontempo and Odell (eds.), pp. 57–72.
Smart, J. J. C. 1993. ‘Why Philosophers Disagree’, in Couture, J. and Nielsen, K. (eds.), Méta-Philosophie: Reconstructing Philosophy? Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 19. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, pp. 67–82.Google Scholar
Smith, A. D. 2002. The Problem of Perception. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. D. 2003. Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Husserl and the Cartesian Meditations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, B. et al. 1992. Letter in The Times (London), 9 May 1992. Available at: .Google Scholar
Smith, D. W. and Thomasson, A. L. (eds.) 2005. Phenomenology and Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRef
Soames, S. 2003. Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, Volume 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E. 1980. ‘The Raft and the Pyramid’, Midwest Studies in Philosophy 5: 2–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sosa, E. 1998. ‘Minimal Intuition’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 257–69.
Stich, S. 1998. ‘Reflective Equilibrium, Analytic Epistemology and the Problem of Cognitive Diversity’, in DePaul and Ramsey (eds.), pp. 95–112.
Strawson, P. F. 1956. ‘Construction and Analysis’, in Ayer, A. J. et al., The Revolution in Philosophy. London: Macmillan, pp. 97–110.Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1959. Individuals: An Essay in Descriptive Metaphysics. London: Methuen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1985. Skepticism and Naturalism: Some Varieties. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 1992. Analysis and Metaphysics: An Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, P. F. 2011. Philosophical Writings, ed. Strawson, G. and Montague, M.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroud, B. ‘What Is Philosophy?’, in Ragland and Heidt (eds.), pp. 25–46.
Taylor, C. 1995. Philosophical Arguments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. 2007. A Secular Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, G. W. 1973. Stylistics. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Uniacke, S. and Carter, A. 2008. ‘Editorial’, Journal of Applied Philosophy 25: 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Villa, D. 2001. Socratic Citizenship. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Waismann, F. 1959. ‘How I See Philosophy’, in Ayer, A. J. (ed.), Logical Positivism. London: George Allen and Unwin, pp. 345–80.Google Scholar
Wang, H. 1985. Beyond Analytic Philosophy: Doing Justice to What We Know. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Weber, Z. 2011. ‘Issue Introduction’, Essays in Philosophy 12 (2): 195–9. Available at: .Google Scholar
Weinberg, J. M., Nichols, S. and Stich, S. 2008. ‘Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions’, in Knobe and Nichols (eds.) 2008a, pp. 17–45.
White, A. R. 1975. ‘Conceptual Analysis’, in Bontempo and Odell (eds.), pp. 103–17.
Whitehead, A. N. 1933. Adventures of Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wild, J. 1958. ‘Is There a World of Ordinary Language?’, The Philosophical Review 67: 460–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. 1985. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
Williams, B. 2003. ‘Contemporary Philosophy: A Second Look’, in Bunnin, N. and Tsui-James, E. P. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 23–34.Google Scholar
Williams, B. 2006. Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, ed. Moore, A. W.. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Williamson, T. 2007. The Philosophy of Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winch, P. 1958. The Idea of a Social Science. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wisdom, J. 1953. Philosophy and Psychoanalysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1958. Philosophical Investigations, trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1961. Tractatus Logico-philosophicus, trans. Pears, D. F. and McGuiness, B. F.. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1967. Zettel, ed. Anscombe, G. E. M. and von Wright, G. H., trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1968. On Certainty, ed. Anscombe, G. E. M. and von Wright, G. H., trans. Paul, D. and Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1979. Wittgenstein’s Lectures 1932–35, ed. Ambrose, A.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. 1998. Culture and Value, revised 2nd edn, ed. von Wright, G. H. and Nyman, H., trans. Winch, P.. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wood, A. 2001. ‘Philosophy: Enlightenment Apology, Enlightenment Critique’, in Ragland and Heidt (eds.), pp. 96–120.
Yeo, R. 1993. Defining Science: William Whewell, Natural Knowledge and Public Debate in Early Victorian Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zabala, S. 2007. ‘Introduction: Gianni Vattimo and Weak Philosophy’, in Zabala, S. (ed.), Weakening Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Gianni Vattimo. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
Zahavi, D. 2007. ‘Subjectivity and Immanence in Michel Henry’, in Grøn, A., Damgaard, I. and Overgaard, S. (eds.), Subjectivity and Transcendence. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 133–47.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×