In the paper to which I am responding, Professor Ayers has set himself the task of formulating a tenable version of realism. Professor Ayers does a number of things: he provides his reading of the origins and developments of the debate about realism and its alternatives in modern philosophy; he criticises some recent prominent ideas, as either inconsistent with realism, and hence as being, as he sees it, idealist, or as being in other ways inadequate; and, he spells out, sometimes without fully developing them, different aspects of the views he favours. Ayers's discussion is both interesting and rich, and my response cannot engage with much of it. I shall certainly not attempt to give an answer to the question in Ayers's title.Articl
Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.