Already a subscriber? Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-10 of 79 documents


1. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
Konstantine Boudouris, Preface to Selected Papers from the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
William L. McBride, Foreword to Selected Papers from the XXIII World Congress Of Philosophy
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
3. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40
Mark D. White, A Modest Comment on McMullin: A Kantian Account of Modesty
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In “A Modest Proposal: Accounting for the Virtuousness of Modesty,” Irene McMullin characterizes the modest person as striking a delicate balance between accurate self-assessment and sensitivity to the feelings of others. She criticizes ‘egalitarian’ understandings of this process as unrealistically demanding, and instead proposes an account based on Sartrean facticity and self-awareness. In this brief comment, I defend the egalitarian accounts, arguing for a specifically Kantian explanation of modesty that combines the best of both the egalitarian and Sartrean views, and is based on basic Kantian concepts of dignity and autonomy. On this account, the modest person honestly assesses her own successes according to her autonomously determined standards, yet exhibits modesty to others out of the recognition of the equal worth and dignity of all persons.
philosophical method
4. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
Evandro Agazzi, The Methodological Turn in Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Controversies have always characterized philosophy as expression of its typical critical attitude that depends on the complexity of the fundamental philosophical issues. Traditionally these discrepancies regarded the answers given to certain questions and, therefore, the content of the opposite doctrines, as all legitimately belonging to philosophy. With modernity the determination of the correct method of thinking becomes the necessary precondition for philosophizing and represents the core of the philosophical activity itself. As a consequence people adopting a certain method of thinking often qualify as non-philosophical the discourse of those who do not belong to their methodological school, independently of the content of the doctrine they defend. This dominance of the methodological concern, on the contrary, has produced the discovery and deepening of several “thinking methods,” whose plurality must be considered a wealth and not a reason for skepticism, since it can offer to philosophy the tools for better coping with the increasing complexity of its fundamental issues.
5. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40
Irene McMullin, A Response to Mark D. White’s “A Modest Comment on McMullin: A Kantian Account of Modesty”
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
In response to Mark D. White’s Kantian critique of my article “A Modest Proposal: Accounting for the Virtuousness of Modesty,” I argue that invoking Kant’s notions of dignity and respect in order to provide an egalitarian account of modesty brings with it conceptual commitments that are not always easy to reconcile with the moral phenomenology of that virtue. In light of this I question White’s claim that a Kantian account of modesty offers a better explanation than the existential phenomenological approach that I endorse.
philosophical method
6. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
Souleymane Bachir Diagne, La Traduction Comme Methode
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
According to Maurice Merleau-Ponty, in the pluralistic world in which we now live, there cannot be an overarching and vertical universal (universel de surplomb) anymore: we have now to find paths, methods, towards what he called, by contrast, a “lateral universality” (universalité latérale). When we consider the human tongues in their de facto plurality, none of them being by essence the language of the universal, that of philosophy and logos, we can see that one meaning of what is called “lateral universal” is translation. It could be said then, somehow, that, “translation is the language of languages” as the Kenyan writer Ngugi Wa Thiong’o wrote. The significance of translation as a method or path towards the “lateral universal” is the notion to be explored in this contribution.
7. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40
Savas L. Tsohatzidis, The Distance Between “Here” and “Where I Am”
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper argues that Michael Dummett’s proposed distinction between a declarative sentence’s “assertoric content” and “ingredient sense” is not in fact supported by what Dummett presents as paradigmatic evidence in its support.
philosophical method
8. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
Dagfinn Føllesdal, The Role of Arguments in Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle have been studied, commented upon and praised for more than 2000 years. What made their work so excellent? And what has made the philosophy produced by so many great philosophers after them insightful, inspiring and well worth studying? Their arguments. Arguments give insights, they help us see how “all weaves into one whole” to speak with Goethe, they “give unity to what was previously dispersed.” It is this “weaving together of what was dispersed” which is the core of arguments.This leads to a very inclusive notion of philosophy, where some of the finest works of art are philosophical. However, this openness to a wide variety of approaches to philosophy does not make all philosophy good philosophy. There are numerous kinds of weaknesses. Three examples are given, that illustrate the following three rules for good scholarship: (1) give proper credit, (2) familiarize yourself with fields outside philosophy that are pertinent to the problems you work on, (3) pay attention to work that has been done by others, especially when this work points to difficulties that you have not considered. These are trivial weaknesses, which should be spotted by editors and referees. Once they have been eliminated, we can concentrate on the arguments. It is the quality of arguments that distinguishes good philosophy from bad, and arguments come in many forms. We philosophers have a special responsibility for developing in ourselves and in others an ability to construct good arguments and to distinguish good arguments from bad ones. This is what Plato and Aristotle did, and it is a special challenge in our time when opinions more and more are shaped by mass media and not by arguments. We must teach good argumentation, and we must practice what we teach in our own philosophical work.
9. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40
Diego E. Machuca, Agrippan Pyrrhonism and the Challenge of Disagreement
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper argues for the following three claims. First, the Agrippan mode from disagreement does not play a secondary role in inducing suspension of judgment. Second, the Pyrrhonist is not committed to the criteria of justification underlying the Five Modes of Agrippa, which nonetheless does not prevent him from non-doxastically assenting to them. And third, some recent objections to Agrippan Pyrrhonism raised by analytic epistemologists and experimental philosophers fail to appreciate the Pyrrhonist’s ad hominem style of argumentation and the real challenge posed by the mode from disagreement.
philosophical method
10. Journal of Philosophical Research: Volume > 40 > Issue: Supplement
John McDowell, Philosophical Method: Remarks For a Symposium on Philosophical Method at the World Congress of Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
I do not believe that it is in general a good thing for philosophers to concern themselves with philosophical method. But in these remarks I discuss an exception, which arises in the interpretation of Wittgenstein. What Wittgenstein does in his Philosophical Investigations cannot be properly understood except in the context of appreciating his explicitly methodological remarks, in which he in effect disclaims any intention to say anything that might be open to dispute. I try to explain how that can be consistent with helpfulness in dealing with philosophical puzzlements.