<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gillies on Counterfactual Scorekeeping</title>
	<atom:link href="http://semantics-online.org/2005/12/gillies-on-counterfactual-scorekeeping/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://semantics-online.org/2005/12/gillies-on-counterfactual-scorekeeping</link>
	<description>A weblog on semantics, pragmatics, philosophy of language, and intersections thereof</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:42:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tony Marmo</title>
		<link>http://semantics-online.org/2005/12/gillies-on-counterfactual-scorekeeping#comment-251</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony Marmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2005 22:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.semantics-online.org/wp/uncategorized/2005/12/gillies-on-counterfactual-scorekeeping#comment-251</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Let me say two things:
[1] I have read the first pages of the paper. Firstly Gilles’ ideas still have to be checked against an explicit modal system. Though I notice he based his analyses on the properties of natural language semantics, it would be interesting if we pick a set of axioms, say S4 or S5 or any other, for instance, and see what the &lt;i&gt;syntax&lt;/i&gt; and the &lt;i&gt;semantics&lt;/i&gt; of the system &lt;i&gt;will tell us&lt;/i&gt; about his strict conditional analyses, what axioms will apply and so on.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;[2]Your paper on the same topic has enticed my curiosity to the extent that I for the moment intend to investigate and work on the issue. By the way, I have added an entire &lt;a&gt;section&lt;/a&gt; devoted to it in my blog. Before I had made an insufficient &lt;i&gt;counterfactuals weak&lt;/i&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let me say two things:<br />
[1] I have read the first pages of the paper. Firstly Gilles’ ideas still have to be checked against an explicit modal system. Though I notice he based his analyses on the properties of natural language semantics, it would be interesting if we pick a set of axioms, say S4 or S5 or any other, for instance, and see what the <i>syntax</i> and the <i>semantics</i> of the system <i>will tell us</i> about his strict conditional analyses, what axioms will apply and so on.</p>
<p>[2]Your paper on the same topic has enticed my curiosity to the extent that I for the moment intend to investigate and work on the issue. By the way, I have added an entire <a>section</a> devoted to it in my blog. Before I had made an insufficient <i>counterfactuals weak</i>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
