This book is a major contribution to the study of the philosopher F. H. Bradley, the most influential member of the nineteenth-century school of British Idealists. It offers a sustained interpretation of Bradley's Principles of Logic, explaining the problem of how it is possible for inferences to be both valid and yet have conclusions that contain new information. The author then describes how this solution provides a basis for Bradley's metaphysical view that reality is one interconnected experience and how this (...) gives rise to a new problem of truth. (shrink)
The nine papers in this valuable collection were originally presented at a conference commemorating the centenary of the publication of Bradley’s Appearance and Reality. Although written independently, there is a reasonable unity of aim among them. The goal of each is to rethink issues in Bradley’s metaphysics and to relate them either to Russell or to ongoing debates in analytic philosophy or both. Even though most of the essays cover both topics, four of them are more concerned with Bradley and (...) Russell and five with Bradley and contemporary debates. (shrink)
Despite periodic references to F. H. Bradley as a dogmatic metaphysician of the worst sort, or an unreformed, conservative, and nonhistorical Hegelian, one of his logical doctrines is now a commonplace: his analysis of the logical form of affirmative universal categorical statements. In “On Denoting” Russell adopted this analysis without discussion, merely noting that it had been “ably argued” by Bradley. Virtually all philosophers since have followed suit. It is now an accepted truth that statements like “All A’s are B” (...) have the logical form. (shrink)
In his Autobiography John Stuart Mill said that his motivation in writing A System of Logic was to meet his opponents, those who held “the German or a priori view” of human knowledge, on their own terms. “The notion that truths external to the mind may be known by intuition or consciousness, independently of observation and experience,” he continued, “is … in these times, the great intellectual support of false doctrines and bad institutions…. There never was such an instrument devised (...) for consecrating all deep seated prejudices.” To counteract “the German or a priori view” Mill argued that knowledge of mathematics and physical science is derived from observation and experience and that it presupposes no a priori or non-natural principles. It is comprised simply of truths known by direct experience and of truths inferred from them. Since mathematical and scientific knowledge is largely a body of inferred truths, A System of Logic is a study of the way in which truths are inferred. To quote Mill’s celebrated definition, logic is “the science of the operations of the understanding which are subservient to the estimation of evidence; both the process itself of advancing from known truths to unknown, and all other intellectual operations in so far as auxiliary to this.”. (shrink)
In his Autobiography John Stuart Mill said that his motivation in writing A System of Logic was to meet his opponents, those who held “the German or a priori view” of human knowledge, on their own terms. “The notion that truths external to the mind may be known by intuition or consciousness, independently of observation and experience,” he continued, “is … in these times, the great intellectual support of false doctrines and bad institutions…. There never was such an instrument devised (...) for consecrating all deep seated prejudices.” To counteract “the German or a priori view” Mill argued that knowledge of mathematics and physical science is derived from observation and experience and that it presupposes no a priori or non-natural principles. It is comprised simply of truths known by direct experience and of truths inferred from them. Since mathematical and scientific knowledge is largely a body of inferred truths, A System of Logic is a study of the way in which truths are inferred. To quote Mill’s celebrated definition, logic is “the science of the operations of the understanding which are subservient to the estimation of evidence; both the process itself of advancing from known truths to unknown, and all other intellectual operations in so far as auxiliary to this.”. (shrink)
The appropriately chosen title of Volume 3 of Bradley’s Collected Works, Refinement and Revision, is a guide to its contents. A further guide as well as a useful outline is provided by Carol Keene’s carefully constructed table of contents. Here it is, slightly abbreviated, but with page numbers to indicate the amount of material.
The appropriately chosen title of Volume 3 of Bradley’s Collected Works, Refinement and Revision, is a guide to its contents. A further guide as well as a useful outline is provided by Carol Keene’s carefully constructed table of contents. Here it is, slightly abbreviated, but with page numbers to indicate the amount of material.
Although T. H. Green is primarily remembered today as a moral and political philosopher, many of his philosophical concerns owe their origins to the Victorian crisis of faith in which a widespread belief in the literal truth of Scripture confronted seemingly incompatible scientific theories. Green attributed this crisis to the inability of science and religion to find accommodation in the popular version of empiricism widely accepted by educated men and women of his day. In his 371-page introduction to Hume’s Treatise, (...) Green argued that this philosophy was unacceptable, even on its own terms, and that it needed to be replaced with a new philosophy of life, one recognizing that both knowledge and human action are .. (shrink)
This paper reconstructs Sir William Hamilton's argument for thinking that the unconditioned is not an object of thought, a conclusion he abbreviates with the slogan ‘to think is to condition’. The paper describes Hamilton's conception of formal logic as the study of the laws of thought and claims that this conception allows these laws, particularly those of non-contradiction and excluded middle, to play a substantive role in Hamilton's argument.
The best introduction to Bradley is Richard Wollheim’s F. H. Bradley. Neither derogatory nor intensely partisan, Wollheim systematically addresses the central issues in Bradley’s philosophy, while in the process explaining and evaluating Bradley’s main arguments. One of the many merits of Wollheim’s book is that in it Bradley does not appear as a wild-eyed metaphysician, a modern Parmenides, but rather as a writer intent on separating logic from psychology. Wollheim continually stresses the importance of logic in Bradley’s thought and takes (...) pains to show that Bradley’s logical positions are frequently close to Russell’s. In this, as well as in other respects, Wollheim succeeds in presenting Bradley as a force to be reckoned with. (shrink)
This is the only general selection available of the writings of the renowned English idealist philosopher F. H. Bradley; it is the ideal introduction to his thought. Bradley's original texts are given an editorial framework in the introductions to each section, allowing students to investigate his philosophy first-hand and yet to be guided through the difficulties presented by his work.
