Corrections to my book ‒ updated
Page 10: “If anything is inconsistent, then everything is inconsistent, everything is true, everything is false, and so on.” The antecedent of that conditional is worded sloppily. It should read, “If even one inconsistent proposition is true, then everything is inconsistent, everything is true, everything is false, and so on.”
Page 52: “it may be only because the thought itself has such foggy content, if any content at all.” I regard the contents of thoughts (when they have content) as propositions, and propositions can’t be foggy. So this is better: “it may be only because it is unclear which, if any, proposition is the content of the indeterminist’s thought.” I thank reader Mark Young for prompting this correction.
Page 58: In the sentence ending “the brute facts that determinists already accept,” the word should of course be “indeterminists.” I thank reader Istvan Csiszar for pointing out the typo!
Page 91: Replace the argument in the second paragraph with the argument I give here. I again thank Mark Young for helping me see the weakness of the original argument.
Page 141: “Being only vacuously true, (50) and (51) have no interesting implications….” That way of putting my point is sloppy. This way is better: “Knowing that (50) and (51) are almost certainly only vacuously true, we cannot properly treat their truth as grounds for accepting their consequents.”
Page 170: “by its making makes less and less of a lasting impression” is garbled. Remove “makes.”
