Abstract
The question I shall attempt to address in what follows is an essentially historical one, namely: Why did analytic philosophy emerge first in Cambridge, in the hands of G. E. Moore and Bertrand Russell, and as a direct consequence of their revolutionary rejection of the philosophical tenets that form the basis of British Idealism? And the answer that I shall try to defend is: it didn't. That is to say, the ‘analytic’ doctrines and methods which Moore and Russell embraced in the very last years of the nineteenth century were not revolutionary, did not emerge first in Cambridge, were the creation of neither Russell nor Moore and cannot be explained by appeal to facts concerning British Idealism. The adoption of the doctrines and methods which characterised the earliest manifestations of British analytic philosophy are to be explained neither by reference to anything specifically British, nor by appeal to anything unproblematically philosophical. Or so I shall argue.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1017/S135824610000672X
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,046
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Origins of Analytic Philosophy.Mitchell S. Green - 1995 - Philosophical Review 104 (4):613.
Metaphysics of Analytic Philosophy.Bruce Aune - 1991 - In Hans Burkhardt & Barry Smith (eds.), Handbook of Metaphysics and Ontology. Philosophia Verlag. pp. 539--543.
Analytic psychology.G. F. Stout - 1896 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 4 (4):4-5.
Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkte.F. Brentano - 1876 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 1:209-213.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Perception and Reflection.Anil Gomes - 2017 - Philosophical Perspectives 31 (1):131-152.
Russell and Husserl (1905–1918): The Not-So-Odd Couple.Nikolay Milkov - 2017 - In Peter Stone (ed.), Bertrand Russell’s Life and Legacy. Wilmington, DE: Vernon Press. pp. 73-96.

View all 16 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ethics in the Analytic Tradition.John Deigh - 2013 - In Roger Crisp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of the History of Ethics. Oxford University Press.
Theory Of Knowledge In Britain From 1860 To 1950.Mathieu Marion - 2008 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 4:5.
Russell and Moore: The Analytical Heritage.Alan R. White - 1972 - Philosophical Quarterly 22 (86):68.
Ethics Dehumanized.Panayot Butchvarov - 2003 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 41 (s):165-183.
Perception and Sense Data.Gary Hatfield - 2013 - In Michael Beaney (ed.), Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytical Philosophy. Oxford University Press. pp. 948-974.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-12-01

Total views
90 ( #120,909 of 2,454,442 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #179,336 of 2,454,442 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes