Thursday, February 16, 2006


Paul Manata wrote:
I defend and explain Van Tilian circularity here:

VR: So Paul, can you see that Wilson has misapplied the Van Tillian understanding of circularity?

At best, we would have to say that Van Til has set himself up for serious misunderstandings, deceiving even the very elect (Wilson).

I have argued in a 1992 paper that the argument that eliminative materialism is self-refuting does not viciously beg the question, as the Churchlands had charged, and in the process I developed an analysis of vicious circularity.

Reppert, V. (1992). Eliminative Materialism, Cognitive Suicide, and Begging the Question. Metaphilosophy 23: 378-92.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Somehow I deleted my post when I wanted to revise it. But what I wanted is for Vic to post relevant portions of his article about vicious circularity, please.