Themes from Kaplan

a lot of lick-spittles paying homage to someone whose one ok article was almost totally ripped off (of p.f. strawson and freddie ayer, along with a ton of people from various conferences over the years, this being kaplan's bailiwick). that said, kaplan's thing is a clear and useful (if borrowed) document. but the same cannot be said for anything else in this volume. almog's thing is boring and vague, as usual. c.a. anderson's thing has absolutely zero point zero to do with kaplan's paper and embodies and complete and total ignorance of its point main points (plus, it's based on a broken and demonstrably false semantics, which entails that 1+1=3 etc.). nathan salmon's article reads like a high school paper. none of the papers in here has very much relevance to kaplan's paper. the volume is just kind of a dumping ground for stuff that would otherwise be hard to publish. kaplan's article 'afterwords' is legitimately good, and i don't think that one was ripped off. the rest--avoid.