No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Reasons, Language, and Tradition: The Idea of Conceptual Content in McDowell’s Mind and World
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 August 2018
Abstract
In Mind and World, John McDowell claims that we need to steer our way between bald naturalism and rampant platonism as two ways to explain our capacity to use concepts. Performing this task requires an explanation of how concepts can be both socially charged and, at the same time, genuinely involving the world as it really is. I suggest that McDowell’s explanation is insufficient and that Wilfrid Sellars’s idea of sense impressions might be used to clarify the relationship between social practices and conceptual knowledge without incurring too much damage to the overall architectonics of McDowell’s theory.
Dans Mind and World, John McDowell affirme que nous devons nous éloigner du naturalisme dépouillé et du platonisme exubérant comme étant deux manières d’expliquer notre capacité à utiliser des concepts. Pour accomplir cette tâche, il est nécessaire d’expliquer comment les concepts peuvent être à la fois chargés socialement et réellement engagés avec le monde tel qu’il est. Je suggère que l’explication de McDowell est insuffisante et que l’idée de Wilfrid Sellars des impressions sensorielles peut être utilisée pour clarifier la relation entre les pratiques sociales et la connaissance conceptuelle, et ceci sans faire encourir trop de dégâts à l’architectonique générale de la théorie de McDowell.
- Type
- Original Article/Article original
- Information
- Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 58 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 491 - 511
- Copyright
- Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2018
References
Allen, Barry 2005 “Epistemological Friction—McDowell’s Minimal Empiricism,” in Mind in World: Essays on John McDowell’s Mind and World, edited by Boros, János. Pécs: Brambauer, pp. 21–22.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Richard 2002 “McDowell’s Domesticated Hegelianism,” in Reading McDowell: On Mind and World, edited by Smith, Nicholas H.. London: Routledge, pp. 9–24.Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert 1996 “Perception and Rational Constraint: McDowell’s Mind and World.” Philosophical Issues 7: 241–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, Robert 1994 Making it Explicit: Reasoning, Representing and Discursive Commitment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bruford, Walter Horace 1975 The German Tradition of Self-Cultivation: Bildung from Humboldt to Thomas Mann. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Butchvarov, Panayot 1998 Skepticism about the External World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Christensen, Carleton 2008 Self and World: From Analytic Philosophy to Phenomenology. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, Elizabeth 2011 “Phenomenology of Error and Surprise: Peirce, Davidson, and McDowell.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 47 (1): 62–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisp, Roger 2000 Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dennis, Peter 2014 “Criteria for indefeasible knowledge: John McDowell and ‘epistemological disjunctivism.’” Synthese 191 (17): 4099–4113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
deVries, Willem 2011 “Sellars vs. McDowell on the Structure of Sensory Consciousness.” Diametros 27: 47–63.Google Scholar
deVries, Willem 2006 “McDowell, Sellars, and Sense Impressions.” European Journal of Philosophy 14 (2): 182–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Echeverri, Santiago 2011 “McDowell’s Conceptualist Therapy for Skepticism.” European Journal of Philosophy 19 (3): 357–386.Google Scholar
Forman, David 2008 “Autonomy as Second Nature: On McDowell’s Aristotelian Naturalism.” Inquiry 51 (6): 563–580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Michael 1996 “Exorcising the Philosophical Tradition: Comments on John McDowell’s Mind and World.” Philosophical Review 105 (4): 427–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glendinning, Simon, and de Gaynesford, Max 1998 “John McDowell on Experience: Open to the Sceptic?” Metaphilosophy 29 (1/2): 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, Georg Friedrich, Wilhelm 1977 Phenomenology of Spirit, translated by Miller, A.V.. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1997 Critique of Practical Reason. Translated and edited by Gregor, Mary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel 1929 Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Smith, Norman Kemp. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Levine, Steven 2012 “Brandom’s Pragmatism.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 48 (2): 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maher, Chauncey 2012 The Pittsburgh School of Philosophy: Sellars, McDowell, Brandom. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McDowell, John 2013 “Perceptual Experience: Both Relational and Contentful.” European Journal of Philosophy 21 (1): 144–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, John 1998 “Having the World in View: Sellars, Kant, and Intentionality.” Journal of Philosophy 95 (9): 431–491.Google Scholar
McDowell, John 1983 “Criteria, Defeasibility, and Knowledge.” Proceedings of the British Academy 68: 455–479.Google Scholar
Price, Huw 1997 “Review of John McDowell’s Mind and World.” Philosophical Books 38: 169–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid 1997 Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schmidt, James 1996 “The Fool’s Truth: Diderot, Goethe, and Hegel.” Journal of the History of Ideas 57 (4): 625–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Michael 1999 Groundless Belief: An Essay on the Possibility of Epistemology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, Crispin 2002 “Human Nature?,” in Reading McDowell: On Mind and World, edited by Smith, Nicholas H.. London: Routledge, pp. 140–159.Google Scholar