In Rivas Monroy , Cancela Silva & Martínez Vidal (eds.), Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities. pp. 71-80 (2008)
In this reply to Professor Hookway’s lecture the comments are focused, first, on the topic of what dichotomies really are, since it is an illuminating way of understanding pragmatism in general and Putnam’s pragmatism in particular. Dichotomies are artifacts that we devise with some useful purpose in mind, but when inflated into absolute dichotomies they become metaphysical bogeys as it is illustrated by the twentieth century distinction between fact and value. Secondly, a brief comment on the so-called “thick” ethical concepts and artifact terms is presented, and finally it is added a word on John L. Austin, whose approach to dichotomies is aligned with pragmatism and Putnam.
|Keywords||Hilary Putnam Dichotomies J. L. Austin Thick ethical concepts|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Through Thick and Thin: Validity and Reflective Judgment.April Flakne - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (3):115-126.
Review of C. Hookway: Truth, Rationality and Pragmatism: Themes From Peirce. [REVIEW]Ruth Anna Putnam - 2001 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (3):641-645.
‘BOGHOSSIAN's BLIND REASONING’, CONDITIONALIZATION AND THICK CONCEPTS A FUNCTIONAL MODEL.Olga Ramirez - 2012 - Ethics in Progress Quarterly 3 (1):31-52.
Hilary Putnam and Immanuel Kant: Two `Internal Realists'?Dermot Moran - 2000 - Synthese 123 (1):65-104.
Added to index2009-09-08
Total downloads152 ( #31,012 of 2,171,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)14 ( #22,626 of 2,171,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?