Two Neglected Arguments for a Pragmatist Metaphysics: Peirce and James on Individuals and Generals

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.3280/sf2022-003010
M. Bella, M. Brioschi
{"title":"Two Neglected Arguments for a Pragmatist Metaphysics: Peirce and James on Individuals and Generals","authors":"M. Bella, M. Brioschi","doi":"10.3280/sf2022-003010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article proposes an integrative reading of Peirce's and James's philosophies, which aims to figure out the main features of a shared pragmatist metaphysics. Two methodologies are adopted to reach this goal: a historical scrutiny of sources (letters, works, manuscripts), prevalent in the first part, and a theoretical investigation of Peirce's and James's philosophies, in the second and third parts. The first part analyzes Peirce's and James's proximity, which lies in their common understanding of pragmatism as an anti-dogmatic method in philosophy, and their alleged main difference, which is represented by the issue of nominalism/anti-nominalism, and pivots around the concepts of individuals and generals. The article challenges the mainstream interpretation that sees Peirce as a champion of generality and continuity, whereas James is known for being an ardent defender of individuality. The arguments supporting such an unconventional interpretation are offered in the second part, which explores Peirce's view of individuality in logic, and the third one, dedicated to James's view of continuity in psychology. As a conclusion, Peirce and James's shared pragmatic metaphysics turns out to be centered on the dynamical bonding between individuals and generals.","PeriodicalId":42923,"journal":{"name":"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RIVISTA DI STORIA DELLA FILOSOFIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3280/sf2022-003010","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article proposes an integrative reading of Peirce's and James's philosophies, which aims to figure out the main features of a shared pragmatist metaphysics. Two methodologies are adopted to reach this goal: a historical scrutiny of sources (letters, works, manuscripts), prevalent in the first part, and a theoretical investigation of Peirce's and James's philosophies, in the second and third parts. The first part analyzes Peirce's and James's proximity, which lies in their common understanding of pragmatism as an anti-dogmatic method in philosophy, and their alleged main difference, which is represented by the issue of nominalism/anti-nominalism, and pivots around the concepts of individuals and generals. The article challenges the mainstream interpretation that sees Peirce as a champion of generality and continuity, whereas James is known for being an ardent defender of individuality. The arguments supporting such an unconventional interpretation are offered in the second part, which explores Peirce's view of individuality in logic, and the third one, dedicated to James's view of continuity in psychology. As a conclusion, Peirce and James's shared pragmatic metaphysics turns out to be centered on the dynamical bonding between individuals and generals.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
实用主义形而上学的两个被忽视的论点:皮尔斯和詹姆斯关于个人和将军
本文对皮尔斯和詹姆斯的哲学进行了综合解读,旨在揭示一种共同的实用主义形而上学的主要特征。为了达到这一目标,我们采用了两种方法:第一部分对资料来源(信件、作品、手稿)进行了历史考察,第二和第三部分对皮尔斯和詹姆斯的哲学进行了理论研究。第一部分分析了皮尔斯和詹姆斯的接近性,这在于他们对实用主义作为哲学中的一种反教条主义方法的共同理解,以及他们所谓的主要区别,这表现在唯名论/反唯名论问题上,并围绕个人和将军的概念展开。这篇文章挑战了主流的解释,即皮尔斯是普遍性和连续性的捍卫者,而詹姆斯则是个性的坚定捍卫者。第二部分探讨皮尔斯在逻辑上的个性观,第三部分探讨詹姆斯在心理学上的连续性观。作为结论,皮尔斯和詹姆斯共同的语用形而上学是以个人和将军之间的动态联系为中心的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Fondata nel 1946 da Mario Dal Pra, La rivista di storia della filosofia si è presto distinta, in Italia e all’estero, per aver affrontato con novità di ipotesi e con rigoroso riscontro filologico, temi e problemi dell’intera tradizione storica del pensiero occidentale. Ha dedicato fascicoli monografici al pensiero di Dewey, Russel, Carnap, Vailati, Hobbes , Hume, Aristotele, Epicuro, Abelardo, Husserl, Kant e Hegel; ha pubblicato e pubblica studi sui problemi di maggiore interesse della storia del pensiero; rende noti testi inediti e documenti; affronta l’esame degli aspetti più significativi del dibattito filosofico contemporaneo.
期刊最新文献
Libri ricevuti Recensioni Spinoza e la temporalità plurale. Dalla teoria del tempo alla teoria della storia Spinoza nel XXI secolo: la nuova edizione critica dell'Ethica e l'orizzonte delle ricerche spinoziane tra Francia e Italia Tra sociniani e impostori: Spinoza e l'Islam. Alcuni appunti
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1