Topoi 10 (2):147-153 (1991)

Authors
Abstract
I have frequently mentioned objective problems and topics in the preceding sections. But what exactly is the force of ‘objective’ here? As my remarks should have made clear I have been using ‘objective’ to contrast with ‘purely historical’. A ‘purely historical’ approach never gets beyond reproduction, commentary, and interpretation. I call an approach ‘objective’ when it involves a philosopher who advances his own theses and claims. This minimal understanding of ‘objectivity’ (in the context of my remarks in this paper) by no means implies that there are problems and topics, systems of concepts, methods, and similar factors that are ‘eternal’, completely independent of the contingencies of history (of philosophy, of the sciences), that are not relative to a language, to a logic, to a model, etc. Indeed whether there are problems, etc., in just this absolute, atemporal sense is itself a question for systematic philosophy. It seems clear that the formulation of a problem can only take place against a cognitive background of some sort and within some ‘conceptual scheme’. 34 Such an assumption is made by most if not all analytic philosophers. But the fact that a philosophical tradition recognizes ‘conceptual schemes’ does not make it a ‘purely historical’, non-objective philosophy, in the sense already introduced and described. A philosopher who explicitly accepts a certain ‘conceptual scheme’ proceeds in an entirely objective and systematic (and not purely historical) manner when, within this framework, he formulates his own theses
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00141335
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: 54,385
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Neurath-Haller Thesis: Austria and the Rise of Scientific Philosophy.Barry Smith - 1997 - In Keith Lehrer & Johann Christian Marek (eds.), Austrian Philosophy Past and Present. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 1-20.
L’Autriche Et la Naissance de la Philosophie Scientifique.Barry Smith - 1995 - Actes de la Recherche En Sciences Sociales 109 (1): 61–71.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Objective Being and “Ofness” in Descartes.Lionel Shapiro - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 84 (2):378-418.
Objectivity and Truth in History.J. L. Gorman - 1974 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 17 (1-4):373 – 397.
A Double Reading of Gramsci: Beyond the Logic of Contingency.Adam David Morton - 2005 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 8 (4):439-453.
“The End of History ” and the Fate of the Philosophy of History.Dun Zhang - 2010 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 5 (4):631-651.
Extending the Dynamics of Reason.Michael Friedman - 2011 - Erkenntnis 75 (3):431-444.
The Flow of Time.Huw Price - 2009 - In Craig Callender (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Time. Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
90 ( #107,101 of 2,362,053 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #553,136 of 2,362,053 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes