Organon F
Volume 29, May 2022, Issue 2, Pages 268–274
ISSN 2585-7150 (online) ISSN 1335-0668 (print)
In this paper, I aim to do three things. First, I introduce the distinction between the Uniqueness Thesis (U) and what I call the Conditional Uniqueness Thesis (U*). Second, I argue that despite their official advertisements, some prominent uniquers effectively defend U* rather than U. Third, some influential considerations that have been raised by the opponents of U misfire if they are interpreted as against U*. The moral is that an appreciation of the distinction between U and U* helps to clarify the contours of the uniqueness debate and to avoid a good deal of talking past each other.
Rationality; rational belief; evidence; uniqueness; permissivism.
Author
Erhan Demircioğlu
Affiliation
Koç University
Address
Department of Philosophy, Koç University, Rumelifeneri Yolu, 34450, Sarıyer – Istanbul, Turkey
Received
21 January 2021
Accepted
12 February 2022
Published online
23 April 2022
Publishers
Institute of Philosophy of the Slovak Academy of Sciences
Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences
APA
Demircioğlu, E. (2022). Conditional Uniqueness. Organon F, 29(2), 268–274. https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2022.29205
Chicago
Demircioğlu, Erhan. 2022. "Conditional Uniqueness." Organon F 29 (2): 268–274. https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2022.29205
Harvard
Demircioğlu, E. (2022). Conditional Uniqueness. Organon F, 29(2), pp. 268–274. https://doi.org/10.31577/orgf.2022.29205
© Erhan Demircioğlu
https://www.sav.sk/?lang=sk&doc=journal-list&part=article_response_page&journal_article_no=28366
The above URL is linked to the article's response page. The response page is a permanent location that is associated with the article's DOI number.
