profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Stephen Schiffer

New York University
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    162
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Events
    3
  •  News and Updates
    62

 More details
  • New York University
    Department of Philosophy
    Distinguished Professor
University of Oxford
Faculty of Philosophy
DPhil, 1970
Areas of Specialization
Metaphysics and Epistemology
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Areas of Interest
Epistemology
Philosophy of Cognitive Science
Logic and Philosophy of Logic
Meta-Ethics
Philosophy of Mind
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Action
Metaphysics
Metaphilosophy
General Philosophy of Science
5 more
  • All publications (162)
  •  316
    Propositions, What Are They Good For?
    In R. Schantz (ed.), Current Issues in Theoretical Philosophy: Prospects for Meaning, Walter De Gruyter. 2007.
    Although there is a vast literature on whether propositional attitudes are relations to propositions, a crucial question that ought to lie at the heart of this debate is not often enough seriously addressed. This is the question of the contribution propositions make to the ways in which we benefit from having our propositional-attitude concepts, if those concepts are concepts of relations to propositions. Unless propositions can be shown to confer a benefit that no non-propositions could provide…Read more
    Although there is a vast literature on whether propositional attitudes are relations to propositions, a crucial question that ought to lie at the heart of this debate is not often enough seriously addressed. This is the question of the contribution propositions make to the ways in which we benefit from having our propositional-attitude concepts, if those concepts are concepts of relations to propositions. Unless propositions can be shown to confer a benefit that no non-propositions could provide, we should probably doubt whether propositional attitudes really are relations to propositions. I believe that propositional attitudes are relations to propositions and that the role played by them in our conceptual economy cannot be played by things of any other kind, and in this paper I try to say why. This paper, in other words, offers my answer to the question posed by my title.
    IntentionalityThe Role of PropositionsPropositions and That-Clauses
  •  182
    Two perspectives on knowledge of language
    Philosophical Issues 16 (1). 2006.
    Knowledge of Language
  •  463
    A problem for a direct-reference theory of belief reports
    Noûs 40 (2): 361-368. 2006.
    (1) The propositions we believe and say are _Russellian_ _propositions_: structured propositions whose basic components are the objects and properties our thoughts and speech acts are about. (2) Many singular terms
    Russellian Theories of Attitude AscriptionsKripke's Puzzle About Belief
  •  77
    Paradox and the A Priori
    In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Oxford Studies in Epistemology: Volume 1, Oxford University Press Uk. pp. 1--273. 2005.
    The A Priori
  • 13.1 the face-value theory of belief reports
    In Ernie Lepore & Barry C. Smith (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language, Oxford University Press. pp. 267. 2005.
    Attitude Ascriptions
  •  86
    Meanings and concepts
    Lingua E Stile 33 (3): 399-411. 1998.
    Concepts, Misc
  •  292
    Evidence= Knowledge: Williamson's Solution to Skepticism?
    In Duncan Pritchard & Patrick Greenough (eds.), Williamson on Knowledge, Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 183--202. 2009.
    A single argument template---the EPH template---can be used to generate versions of the best known and most challenging skeptical problems. In his brilliantly groundbreaking book Knowledge and Its Limits, Timothy Williamson presents a theory of knowledge and evidence which he clearly intends to provide a response to skepticism in its most important forms. After laying out EPH skepticism and reviewing possible ways of responding to it, I show how elements of Williamson’s theory motivate a hithert…Read more
    A single argument template---the EPH template---can be used to generate versions of the best known and most challenging skeptical problems. In his brilliantly groundbreaking book Knowledge and Its Limits, Timothy Williamson presents a theory of knowledge and evidence which he clearly intends to provide a response to skepticism in its most important forms. After laying out EPH skepticism and reviewing possible ways of responding to it, I show how elements of Williamson’s theory motivate a hitherto unexplored way of responding to EPH-generated skeptical arguments. Then I offer reasons to doubt the correctness of Williamson’s response
    Evidence and KnowledgeReplies to Skepticism, Misc
  •  3
    Functionalism and belief
    In Myles Brand (ed.), _The Representation Of Knowledge And Belief_, Tucson: University of Arizona Press. 1986.
    Functionalism, Misc
  •  79
    Reply to Yagisawa
    Philosophical Studies 76 (2-3). 1994.
    Semantics
  •  271
    Yes, a reply to Brian Loar's "can we confirm supervenient properties?"
    Philosophical Issues 4 93-100. 1993.
    Intentionality
  •  24
    Critical notice (review)
    Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7 (3): 637-650. 1977.
  •  38
    Replies
    Noûs 34 (s1): 321-343. 2000.
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University