Is Everything Revisable?

Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 4:349-357 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Over the decades, the claim that everything is revisable (defended by Quine and others) has played an important role in Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. Some time ago, Katz (1988) argued that this claim is paradoxical. This paper does not discuss this objection but rather argues that the claim of universal revisability allows for two different readings but in each case leads to a contradiction and is false.

Author's Profile

Peter Baumann
Swarthmore College


Added to PP

216 (#43,508)

6 months
23 (#61,886)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?