Neil Tennant is Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Cognitive Science at Ohio State University. He previously held chairs at the University of Stirling, Scotland, and at the Australian National University. He has held visiting professorships or fellowships at Munich, Cambridge, Michigan, Pittsburgh, and Dartmouth College.

"This is an extremely ambitious book. The list of topics it addresses is a selection of major philosophical controversies of the twentieth century: the nature of realism, skepticism, the relations between knowledge, truth and understanding, the status of classical logic, the analytic/synthetic distinction, and the empiricist criterion of cognitive significance. on each of these topics, Tennant offers a number of valuable insights, and the book as a whole is a fine example of clarity and rigor in philosophy." --The Philosophical Review

"[Tennant's} book addresses a number of important issues in contemporary philosophy, and the reader has much to gain from a careful study of the development. Few stones are left unturned...this rich study...presents a delightful and compelling holistic argument against 'Kripke's meanining-sceptic'...'a new, improved version' of the manifestation argument, and 'provides a revival of the positivist notion of "cognitive significance"'. The author provides a rigorous criterion aimed at demarcating 'the empirically meaningful from the metaphysically meaningless'. He shows that his distinction avoids the now-standard refutations of the notion of cognitive significance."--Mathematical Reviews

"This is a new major and systematic monograph on the realism debate, written by a very skilful and sophisticated defender of anti-realism...Tennant attempts to show that [intuitionistic relevant] logic has much wider application than one might suppose. It suffices not only for mathematics but also adequately captures the basic inferential practices of empirical sciences. It would be hard to overestimate the significance of that attempt...Tennant's views...put the whole [anti-realist] research programme in a quite different metaphilosophical setting, more congenial to the idea of naturalized philosophy...The book is very lucidly written, and the main arguments are well signposted, presented and summarized...it is a very advanced work."--The Review of Metaphysics

"This is a bold book, perhaps even a brave book...a book broad in scope, and certainly a good book...Anyone interested in the realist/anti-realist controversy, whichever side she takes, should read it, for it presents the most sophisticated defence of moderate anti-realism to date."--Mind