Abstract
In this commentary, I shall attempt to bring to light two points that remain
unclear despite McLennan’s (2001) exposé of the Loughborough team’s ‘contributions’ to the debate. My intention is one of clarification, arguably an old fashioned intention given the current intellectual climate, but an important
one considering the confusion that the Edwards–Parker exchange perpetuated.
No doubt my references to truth and my recourse to logic will be regarded as equally quaint, but as Strawson recently observed, the 20th century was ‘the silliest of the centuries, philosophically speaking’ (Strawson, 2000: 12).
unclear despite McLennan’s (2001) exposé of the Loughborough team’s ‘contributions’ to the debate. My intention is one of clarification, arguably an old fashioned intention given the current intellectual climate, but an important
one considering the confusion that the Edwards–Parker exchange perpetuated.
No doubt my references to truth and my recourse to logic will be regarded as equally quaint, but as Strawson recently observed, the 20th century was ‘the silliest of the centuries, philosophically speaking’ (Strawson, 2000: 12).
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 102-107 |
Number of pages | 6 |
Journal | History of the Human Sciences |
Volume | 14 |
Issue number | 3 |
Publication status | Published - Aug 2001 |
Externally published | Yes |