Reply to James Muir

Educational Philosophy and Theory 36 (4):455–458 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This is a reply to Muir's charge of ignorance about the history of philosophy of education and raises the question whether philosophy of education is a pure, autonomous discipline.

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1111/j.1469-5812.2004.00080.x

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

The strange case of mr Bloom.J. R. Muir - 1996 - Journal of Philosophy of Education 30 (2):197–214.
The history of educational ideas and the credibility of philosophy of education.James R. Muir - 1998 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 30 (1):7–26.
The development of nature resources and the integrity of nature.Bill Devall & George Sessions - 1984 - Environmental Ethics 6 (4):293-322.
The 'Scotch Metaphysics' in 19th Century Benares.Richard Fox Young - 2006 - Journal of Scottish Philosophy 4 (2):139-157.
John Muir and His Legacy. [REVIEW]Donald Watson - 1983 - Environmental Ethics 5 (3):277-281.
William James's Divided Self and the Process of Its Unification: A Reply to Richard Gale.James O. Pawelski - 2003 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 39 (4):645 - 656.
Alchemy and the absolute.M. M. Pattison Muir - 1913 - Mind 22 (85):48-61.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
30 (#519,519)

6 months
8 (#342,364)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references