Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-01T03:27:20.766Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Final Thoughts: Rejoinder to Phillip Hansen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 October 2016

Frank Cunningham
Frank Cunningham*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto and Simon Fraser University
*
Urban Studies ProgramSimon Fraser University515 W. Hastings St, Unit 2100 Vancouver, B.C. V6B 5K3, email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As I use the term, philosophy is critical thinking about fundamental matters, where “critical” includes identifying and evaluating justifications for beliefs about fundamental matters or proposing and defending such justifications. Like the notion of philosophy itself, what counts as fundamental is also contestable, but Phillip Hansen's characterization of its being “about how humans ought to live, about what is good for them” is an apt example. Macpherson certainly does attend to this and similar topics and he castigates his contemporary political scientists for neglecting them.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 49 , Issue 3 , September 2016 , pp. 573 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Kant, Immanuel. 2003 [1788]. The Critique of Pure Reason, London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar