paper 2: graphics fixed (Ds and Fs ital'd, sorites items bolded)

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/papers/3.tex b/papers/3.tex
index efbc913..a4ba95e 100644
--- a/papers/3.tex
+++ b/papers/3.tex
@@ -183,7 +183,7 @@ Thus, overall, while AH response is a good substantive explanation answering the
 In this paper, I have examined three responses to Williamson's Explanation Challenge and argued that each response faces their own problems. While I argue for the stronger conclusion that the first two challenges fail, I argue for the weaker conclusion that the last response succeeds but only with additional dialectical cost to contingentism. I hope this paper has helped to clarify the stake of Williamson's ``first horn" to contingentism in Chapter 6 and strengthen his argument against contingentism. 
 
 \section{Appendix}
-
+\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0pt}
 \subsection{The proof for (Tracking)}
 First, we can observe the following proof: \\
 \begin{quote}