What’s wrong with contemporary philosophy?
Article Properties
-
LanguageEnglish
-
DOI (url)
-
Publication Date2006/09/01
-
Journal
-
Indian UGC (journal)
-
Refrences2
-
Citations7
-
Kevin Mulligan
-
Peter Simons
-
Barry Smith
Journal Category
Philosophy
Psychology
Religion
Philosophy (General)
Refrences
| Title | Journal | Journal Categories | Citations | Publication Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russell B (1911) Le réalisme analytique. Bulletin de la société française de philosophie 11:53–61 | 1911 | |||
| Experience and analysis | 2005 |
Citations
| Title | Journal | Journal Categories | Citations | Publication Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Vedāntic Realism of Rasvihari Das | Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research |
| 2022 | |
Problems with Publishing Philosophical Claims We Don't Believe | Episteme |
| 2 | 2022 |
| Two different approaches to philosophy a critical reflection on contemporary Chinese philosophy | Asian Philosophy |
| 2018 | |
What is A Philosophical Question? | Metaphilosophy |
| 14 | 2013 |
| Natural Theology Is Alive | Studia theologica |
| 2 | 2013 |
Citations Analysis
The category
Philosophy. Psychology. Religion: Philosophy (General) 6
is the most commonly referenced area in studies that cite this article. The first research to cite this article was titled Horizon for Scientific Practice: Scientific Discovery and Progress and was published in 2010. The most recent citation comes from a 2022 study titled The Vedāntic Realism of Rasvihari Das. This article reached its peak citation in 2022, with 2 citations. It has been cited in 7 different journals, 14% of which are open access. Among related journals, the Journal of Indian Council of Philosophical Research cited this research the most, with 1 citations. The chart below illustrates the annual citation trends for this article.