Dialogues with the dead

Synthese 67 (1):33 - 49 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Serious work in history of philosophy requires doing something very difficult: conducting a hypothetical dialogue with dead philosophers. Is it worth devoting to it the time and energy required to do it well? Yes. Quite apart from the intrinsic interest of understanding the past, making progress toward solving philosophical problems requires a good grasp of the range of possible solutions to those problems and of the arguments which motivate alternative positions, a grasp we can only have if we understand well philosophy's past. Philosophers who concentrate too much on the present are apt to assume too simple a view of alternative theories and of important philosophical arguments. Ryle and Austin offer instructive examples of how it is possible to go wrong by ignoring or misrepresenting historical figures.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
82 (#187,247)

6 months
3 (#447,120)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Sense and Sensibilia.John Langshaw Austin - 1962 - Oxford University Press.
The Concept of Mind.Gilbert Ryle - 1949 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 141:125-126.
An autobiography.R. G. Collingwood - 1939 - New York, etc.]: Oxford University Press.
Descartes against the skeptics.Edwin M. Curley - 1978 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

View all 11 references / Add more references