Journal of the History of Philosophy

This book is essential reading for all interpreters of William James. Too often they, myself included, sadly neglect the historical setting of his work. Bordogna's erudite and often brilliant scholarly forays in the history of science and intellectual history, which make effective use of concepts from the sociology of science and the history of disciplinarity, go a long way to compensate for this deficiency.

This is a real book, and a bold one at that, because it has an exciting underlying thesis that runs throughout, everything being an illustration and deepening of it; however, the numerous formulations fluctuate between a weak and strong version. The following quotations present the weak thesis: James' "general philosophy, properly conducted, would facilitate new modes of social relationships and new ways of collaboration and communication among the diverse kind of inquirers. These new modes of engagement would bring together philosophers, psychologists, practitioners of the other sciences, and people with practical concerns, making them into a community that would engage in cross-disciplinary and cross-divisional discussion" (90; see also 11, 15, 192, 265); "James located philosophers in interstitial knowledge spaces, and made philosophy … into a form of mediation between diverse modes of inquiry" (245).

The following quotations present the stronger thesis, in which philosophy does more than just facilitate cross-disciplinary conversations and exchanges, since it unifies or synthesizes the knowledge gained by these diverse approaches: "I paint James as a unifier" who wanted "to create a 'completely unified system of knowledge'" (9); "through his encounters with the 'disputed boundary' increasingly dividing two 'lots' in the field of knowledge … James framed an early synthetic understanding of philosophy" (16); "James's attempts to create a properly inclusive practice of philosophy went hand in glove with his efforts to create an integrated image of the human subject and to frame a cross-disciplinary inquiry into human nature" (17).

The weak thesis requires only the facilitating of communication and cooperation between people in diverse disciplines, letting everyone have their say and be taken seriously. The strong thesis goes on to require that, in addition, some unification, integration, or synthesis of the knowledge gained through these diverse approaches to understanding reality. It turns out, however, that the strong thesis is nothing but the weak thesis because the unification that is achieved is nothing but the facilitating of communication and cooperation. The following quotations bring this out. James, in the last decade of his life, wanted philosophy to "mediate between the special sciences and other disciplines, promote the idea of cross-disciplinary cooperation, and, in that way, give unity to knowledge" (90; my italics). Philosophy for James "would unify knowledge not on intellectual grounds but instead socially, by paving the way for the formation of open, pluralistic, yet cohesive, even intimate, communities of inquirers" (221; my italics).

It is well that Bordogna goes with the weaker thesis, since James' philosophy is radically pluralistic. He neutralizes the apparent clashes between the world views of the scientist, moral agent, and mystic by holding that actuality is relative to the passing interests and purposes of a person. In some cases, he sides with one of the conflicting views. For example, he gives pride of place to introspection over the perspective of a third person, even making one's [End Page 252] personal identity over time dependent on what is introspectively vouchsafed—feelings of warmth and intimacy between successive experiences—rather than on anything a neurophysiologist might discover.

The introduction begins with a paradigm case of James' boundary work, his essay on "The Energies of Men." Herein he makes effective use of a wide diversity of different views and approaches. Chapter 1 gives a fascinating account of how Hugo Munsterberg's design for Emerson Hall was a geographical reflection of his conception of the role of philosophy with respect to science. Munsterberg is the recurrent villain of the book, coming across as incredibly pompous, arrogant, conceited, and authoritarian—William...