McDowell's germans: Response to 'on Pippin's postscript'

European Journal of Philosophy 15 (3):411–434 (2007)
Abstract
As McDowell makes clear in ‘On Pippin’s Postscript’ and in many other works, the interpretive question at issue in this exchange—how to understand the relation between Kant and Hegel, especially as that concerns Kant’s central ‘Deduction’ argument in the Critique of Pure Reason1—brings into the foreground an even larger problem on which all the others depend: the right way to understand at the highest level of generality the relation between active or spontaneous thought and our receptive and corporeal sensibility and bodily embodiment. From Mind and World on, McDowell has indicated that this is in fact a problem so inclusive as to be common to theoretical and practical philosophy; that the issue of how thought informs our sensibility is at bottom the same (raises the same logical or conceptual issue) as the issue of how thought could be said to inform, to be active ‘in’, bodily action; that we can be in the grip of the same bad, misleading picture in accounting for executing an intention as in accounting for acquiring perceptual knowledge.2 I agree with, and follow his lead in, setting the basic framework for the particular issues in just this way. With matters so set out, there are two main areas of disagreement: (i) how to state the role of concepts and especially conceptual activity in the sensible uptake of the world and (ii) what to make of Hegel’s claim for a speculative ‘identity’ between inner and outer in action, or how to state the role of intentions ‘in’ bodily activity. In both cases, McDowell thinks I go too far; too far in terms of what is philosophically correct, and too far in attributing those positions to Hegel. It is the former topic that is in play in this exchange, although elements of the latter arise as well. There is first an issue lingering from the first exchange in Reading McDowell.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0378.2007.00270.x
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,300
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Mind and World.John McDowell - 1994 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Lecture I: Sellars on Perceptual Experience.John McDowell - 1998 - Journal of Philosophy 95 (9):431-450.
Brandom's Hegel.Robert B. Pippin - 2005 - European Journal of Philosophy 13 (3):381–408.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A Sense of Occasion.Charles Travis - 2005 - Philosophical Quarterly 55 (219):286–314.
McDowell's Disjunctivism and Other Minds.Anil Gomes - 2011 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 54 (3):277-292.
Kelly and McDowell on Perceptual Content.Frederick R. Ablondi - 2002 - Electronic Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7.
On When Words Are Called For: Cavell, McDowell, and the Wording of the World.Avner Baz - 2003 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 46 (4):473 – 500.
Hegel on Action.Arto Laitinen & Constantine Sandis (eds.) - 2010 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Action, Right and Morality in Hegel's Philosophy of Right.Stephen Houlgate - 2010 - In Arto Laitinen & Constantine Sandis (eds.), Hegel on Action. Palgrave-Macmillan.
On Pippin's Postscript.John McDowell - 2007 - European Journal of Philosophy 15 (3):395–410.
Mind, Body, and World: Todes and McDowell on Bodies and Language.Joseph T. Rouse - 2005 - Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 48 (1):38-61.
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total downloads
64 ( #84,478 of 2,193,221 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #290,278 of 2,193,221 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature