 Various authors have noted that additional information is needed to derive Putnam’s desired conclusion (‘I am not a brain in a vat’). One of the earliest and most important of these reconstructions was suggested by Anthony Brueckner (1986). He proposed that Putnam’s argument could reasonably be construed as an instance of disjunction elimination (\(p \lor q\), \(p \rightarrow r\), \(q \rightarrow r \vdash r\)) as follows: