Facing facts?

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In his recent book, Stephen Neale provides an extended defence of the claim that Godel's slingshot has dramatic consequences for fact theorists (and, in particular, for fact theorists who look with favour on referential treatments of definite descriptions). I argue that the book-length treatment provides no strengthening of the case that Neale has made elsewhere for this implausible claim. Moreover, I also argue that various criticisms of Neale's case that I made on a previous occasion have met with no successful resistance. If Neale is serious about facing facts, then he needs to face the fact that his central contentions are unsupportable.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)621-643
    Number of pages23
    JournalAustralasian Journal of Philosophy
    Volume82
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2004

    Cite this