Jim Pryor sent a link to the following “amusing correction”:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/12/magazine/12cxn.html?_r=1&ex=1297400400&en=dd4c&oref=slogin.

bq. An interview on June 5, 2005, with Carl Icahn misstated a word of the title of a thesis he wrote while he was an undergraduate at Princeton. As a reader informed The Times two weeks ago, it is “The Problem of Formulating an Adequate Explication of the Empiricist Criterion of Meaning,” not “Imperious Criterion.”

I’m a rationalist, so I think writing ‘imperious’ for ’empiricist’ isn’t that bad, but still, this shouldn’t happen!

On the weekend I put up a post on “updating vague probabilities”:http://tar.weatherson.org/archives/004680.html which was meant to come after, not before, “this frivolous post on conditionals”:http://tar.weatherson.org/archives/004683.html. Sadly my blogging skills prevented this. Anyway, “Seth Yalcin”:http://mit.edu/yalcin/www/ pointed out that he had a similar idea that he puts to very good use towards the end of his “theory of epistemic modals”:http://mit.edu/yalcin/www/epmodal-dec05.pdf. So credit to Seth for this idea, and go check out “his paper”:http://mit.edu/yalcin/www/epmodal-dec05.pdf.