Is there a Lockean argument against expressivism?

Analysis

Volumn 63, Issue 277, 2003, Pages 76-86

  Smith, Michael ^a   Stoljar, Daniel ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749432179     PISSN: 00032638     EISSN: 14678284     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1467-8284.t01-6-00631     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Adams, E. 1975. The Logic of Conditionals. Dordrecht: Reidel
2. Bennett, J. 1976. Linguistic Behaviour. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
3. Jackson, F. 2001. What is expressivism? Philosophical Books 42: 10-17
4. Jackson, F. and P. Pettit. 1998. A problem for expressivism. Analysis 58: 239-51
5. Jackson, F. and P. Pettit. 1999. Reply to Ridge. Brown Electronic Article Review Service, ed. J. Dreier and D. Estlund. http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Philosophy/bears/homepage.html
6. Grice, H.P. 1957. Meaning. Philosophical Review 66: 377-88
7. Geach, P. T. 1956. Assertion. Repr. in his Logic Matters, 254-69. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1972
8. Horwich, P. 1993. Gibbard's theory of norms. Philosophy and Public Affairs 22: 67-78
9. Ridge, M. 1999. Ridge reviews Jackson and Pettit. Brown Electronic Article Review Service, ed. J. Dreier and D. Estlund. http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Philosophy/bears/homepage.html
10. Lewis, D. 1969. Convention. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press
11. Locke, J. 1689. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Oxford: Clarendon Press
12. Schiffer, S. 1973. Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press