David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Idealistic Studies 35 (1):35-47 (2005)
Gadamer profoundly appreciates Collingwood’s Logic of Question and Answer (LQA). But while he grants its innovative serviceability, he contends that it has not been fully developed, and that its function in historical re-enactment is an exercise in historicism. Attempts have been made to defend Collingwood from Gadamer’s charge of historicism. But they have not documented the source ofGadamer’s alleged misunderstanding of Collingwood. This article will do the task. I will argue that Gadamer came up with a wrong conclusion about Collingwood’s doctrine of re-enactment because he overlooked the context of a passage in The Idea of History where he examined Collingwood’s discussion of Plato’s argument in Theaetetus. I will argue that Gadamer’s lack of perspective of the overall context of Collingwood’s discussion caused him to focus on a wrong aspect of the argument. This is quite unfortunate. Because of this, Gadamer is unable to appreciate more Collingwood’s LQA and its special role in hermeneutics
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dimitrios Vardoulakis (2004). The Vicissitude of Completeness: Gadamer's Criticism of Collingwood. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 12 (1):3 – 19.
Kenneth B. McIntyre (2008). Historicity as Methodology or Hermeneutics: Collingwood's Influence on Skinner and Gadamer. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (2):138-166.
John P. Hogan (1987). Hermeneutics and the Logic of Question and Answer: Collingwood and Gadamer. Heythrop Journal 28 (3):263–284.
A. P. Fell (1991). R. G. Collingwood and the Hermeneutical Tradition. International Studies in Philosophy 23 (3):1-12.
Pablo Arnau (1997). Relativismo Cognitivo E Historicidad: (Dilthey, Collingwood, Gadamer). Universitat de València.
Giuseppina D'Oro (2000). On Collingwood's Rehabilitation of the Ontological Argument. Idealistic Studies 30 (3):173-188.
Karim Dharamsi (2008). From Norms to Uses and Back Again. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (2):167-184.
Stephen Turner (2011). Collingwood and Weber Vs. Mink: History After the Cognitive Turn. Journal of the Philosophy of History 5 (2):230-260.
Serge Grigoriev (2008). Continuity of the Rational: Naturalism and Historical Understanding in Collingwood. Journal of the Philosophy of History 2 (2):119-137.
John Luckman (1991). Metaphysics, History and the Unpublished Manuscripts. International Studies in Philosophy 23 (3):27-45.
Gary K. Browning (2004). Rethinking R.G. Collingwood: Philosophy, Politics, and the Unity of Theory and Practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
William H. Dray (1995). History as Re-Enactment: R.G. Collingwood's Idea of History. Oxford University Press.
Philip Smallwood (2000). Historical Re-Enactment, Literary Transmission, and the Value of R. G. Collingwood. Translation and Literature 9:3-24.
Michael J. O'Neill (2006). A Peculiar “Faith”: On R.G. Collingwood's Use of Saint Anselm's Argument. Saint Anselm Journal 3 (2):32-47.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads1 ( #446,747 of 1,102,999 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,567 of 1,102,999 )
How can I increase my downloads?