Advertisement

Philosophical Studies

, Volume 176, Issue 5, pp 1347–1355 | Cite as

Soames on ethics: A new vision for the future of analytic philosophy?

  • Aaron PrestonEmail author
Article
  • 161 Downloads

My official task in this symposium is to comment on the third part of Soames’ volume, subtitled “Is Ethics Possible?” This part of A New Vision consists in three chapters, two of which (13 and 14) are essentially expanded versions of chapters 14 and 15 of The Dawn of Analysis. Valuable additions have been made to these expanded chapters, but to my mind the most interesting and valuable addition—and really the most striking and important feature of the entire volume—is a brand new chapter on a view that had no appreciable impact on the analytic tradition whatsoever. Chapter 12 is given to an exposition of Moritz Schlick’s moral theory as developed in The Problems of Ethics (1930), which, with a few modifications and extensions, Soames uses as a touchstone in his assessments of emotivism and intutionism in chapters 13 and 14.1Schlick’s perspective and Soames’ adaptation of it are extremely interesting merely as perspectives in ethical theory. However, to my mind, even more interesting...

Notes

References

  1. Beaney, M. (2006). Soames on philosophical analysis. Philosophical Books, 7, 255–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beaney, M. (2013). Analytic philosophy and history of philosophy: The development of the idea of rational reconstruction. In E. H. Reck (Ed.), The historical turn in analytic philosophy (pp. 231–260). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beaney, M. (2015). Soames on frege: Provoking thoughts. Philosophical Studies, 72, 1651–1660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hacker, P. (2006). Soames’ History of analytic philosophy. The Philosophical Quarterly, 56(222), 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kremer, M. (2005). Review of philosophical analysis in the twentieth century (vol. 2), Notre Dame philosophical reviews.Google Scholar
  6. Kremer, M. (2013). What is the good of philosophical history? In E. H. Reck (Ed.), The historical turn in analytic philosophy (pp. 294–325). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. MacIntyre, A. (1984). After virtue. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  8. Pincock, C. (2006). Review of philosophical analysis in the twentieth century, Russell 25 (winter 2005–2006) (pp. 167–172).Google Scholar
  9. Pincoffs, E. (1971). Quandary ethics. Mind, 80(320), 552–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pincoffs, E. (1986). Quandaries and virtues. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  11. Preston, A. (2004). Prolegomena to any future history of analytic philosophy. Metaphilosophy, 35(4), 445–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Preston, A. (2007). Analytic philosophy: The history of an illusion. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  13. Soames, S. (2003). Philosophical analysis in the twentieth century (Vol. 2). Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Soames, S. (2006a). What is history for? Reply to critics of the Dawn of analysis. Philosophical Studies, 129, 645–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Soames, S. (2006b). Hacker’s complaint. The Philosophical Quarterly, 56(224), 426–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Soames, S. (2006c). Reply to critics of philosophical analysis in the twentieth century, unpublished ms. from a talk at the Pacific Division Meetings of the American Philosophical Association. Available at: https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/678/docs/Replies/Rep__Philosophical_Ayalysis.pdf. Accessed 27 Feb 2019.
  17. Soames, S. (2007). What we know now that we didn’t know then: reply to critics of the age of meaning. Philosophical Studies, 135(3), 461–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Soames, S. (2008) Analytic philosophy in America. In C. Misak (Ed.), The oxford handbook of American philosophy. Oxford. (Reprinted in Analytic philosophy in America and other historical and contemporary essays (Princeton, 2014), p. 7).Google Scholar
  19. Soames, S. (2015a). Precis of the analytic tradition in philosophy, vol. 1: The founding giants. Philosophical Studies, 172(6), 1647–1650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Soames, S. (2015b). Reply to critics of the analytic tradition in philosophy, vol. 1: The founding giants. Philosophical Studies, 172(6), 1681–1696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Soames, S. (2017). The analytic tradition in philosophy, vol. 2: A new vision. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Soames, S. (2018). Foreword. In D. Willard, et al. (Eds.), The disappearance of moral knowledge. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Willard, D., et al. (2018). The disappearance of moral knowledge. New York and London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Valparaiso UniversityValparaisoUSA

Personalised recommendations