Abstract

This article asks to what extent R.G. Collingwood's 'logic of question and answer' is compatible with the central tenets of Giovanni Gentile's 'actualism'. It is argued that, interpreted as an actualist device, Collingwood's 'logic' offers useful insights into the mechanisms underlying Gentile's theory. Both must confront what I call the 'Actualist Dilemma,' which holds that if there is no reality independent of actual thinking, truth becomes entirely relative to whatever beliefs a thinker happens to have, including those regarding the structures and conditions by which truth is determined. Understood as attempts to address the basic problem of the relation between truth and inquiry, these theories are more alike than they first appear. For both, the foundation of truth is an interpersonal standard regarded from the subjective standpoint of actual thinking.