The DOI matches its Crossref record.
From metaphysics to ethics: a defence of conceptual analysis
Abstract
1. Serious metaphysics and supervenience 2. The role of conceptual analysis 3. Conceptual analysis and metaphysical necessity 4. The primary-quality view of colour 5. The location problem for ethics: moral properties and moral content 6. Analytical descriptivism Bibliography Index
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Dancy, J. (2004) · doi:10.1093/0199270023.001.0001 · Cited by 1,677
Color realism and color science
Byrne, A., & Hilbert, D. R. (2003) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x03000013 · Cited by 517
Thomasson, A. L. (2007) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195319910.001.0001 · Cited by 490
The Foundations of Two-Dimensional Semantics
Chalmers, D. J. (2006) · Two-Dimensional Semantics · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199271955.003.0004 · Cited by 391
Nonreductive Physicalism and the Limits of the Exclusion Principle
List, C., Menzies, P., & Journal of Philosophy, I. (2009) · Journal of Philosophy · doi:10.5840/jphil2009106936 · Cited by 340
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1999-02-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 06
- Pages
- 36-3262-36-3262
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W3127955956
- Cited by
- 1,469
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: From metaphysics to ethics: a defence of conceptual analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.36-3262
- The paper
- From metaphysics to ethics: a defence of conceptual analysis. (1999). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.36-3262
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
