In Karim Dharamsi, Giuseppina D’Oro & Stephen Leach (eds.), Collingwood on Philosophical Methodology. Springer Verlag. pp. 177-207 (2018)

Authors
Abstract
Dharamsi considers Collingwood’s defence of the autonomy of the mental and contrasts it with the one articulated by liberal naturalists such as McDowell. Both Collingwood and McDowell, Dharamsi argues, acknowledge the irreducibly normative nature of the study of mind and both reject the widespread naturalist assumption that philosophy is continuous with natural science. The liberal naturalist’s and Collingwood’s strategy are however fundamentally different. McDowell’s strategy is to soften naturalism so as to accommodate within its womb the normative character of the mental, which a harder or more traditional form of naturalism struggles to provide a home for. Collingwood’s strategy agrees with McDowell’s diagnosis of the problem, but not with his proposed solution. For Collingwood, the solution lies not in liberalizing nature, but in rejecting a conception of metaphysics as a science of pure being and understanding it instead as a historical enquiry into the presuppositions of science, including natural science.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-02432-1_8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 68,916
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

From Norms to Uses and Back Again.Karim Dharamsi - 2008 - Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (2):167-184.
Gadamer’s Criticisms of Collingwood.E. F. Bertoldi - 1984 - Idealistic Studies 14 (3):213-228.
Collingwood's Reform of Metaphysics.D. Ilodigwe - 2015 - Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 21 (1):25-61.
Collingwood and the Metaphysics of Experience.Michael J. O’Neill - 2005 - Review of Metaphysics 59 (1):169-171.
Development of Collingwood's Conception of Historical Object.P. Das - 1990 - Indian Philosophical Quarterly 17 (2):211.
Collingwood and Ryle on the Concept of Mind.Giuseppina D'oro - 2003 - Philosophical Explorations 6 (1):18 – 30.
Collingwoods Claim That History is a Science.Jan van der Dussen - 2007 - Collingwood and British Idealism Studies 13 (2):5-30.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-09-04

Total views
2 ( #1,441,270 of 2,497,781 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #283,405 of 2,497,781 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

My notes