Advertisement

Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy: The Development of the Idea of Rational Reconstruction

  • Michael Beaney
Part of the History of Analytic Philosophy book series (History of Analytic Philosophy)

Abstract

Analytic philosophy has had an uneasy relationship with the discipline of history of philosophy1 throughout its life. Analytic philosophers often either scorn or simply ignore history of philosophy. Where interpretations have been offered of past philosophical works, in what we can call ‘analytic’ history of philosophy, they have tended to be ‘rational reconstructions’. In recent years, however, philosophers trained in the analytic tradition have begun to look at the history of analytic philosophy itself more seriously, and the debate about the relationship between philosophy and history of philosophy has been brought closer to home. In this chapter, I consider some of the philosophical and historiographical presuppositions and implications of this debate, focusing on the idea of rational reconstruction. This idea developed alongside analytic philosophy itself and holds the key to understanding one central thread in the history of the relationship between analytic philosophy and history of philosophy.

Keywords

Actual History Rational Reconstruction Historical Reconstruction Logical Construction Hermeneutic Circle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, R. Lanier, 2005, ‘Neo-Kantianism and the Roots of Anti-psychologism’, British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 13, pp. 287–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayer, A.J., 1936, Language, Truth and Logic, London: Penguin; 2nd ed. 1946.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, G.P. and Hacker, P.M.S., 1984, Frege: Logical Excavations, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  4. Beaney, Michael, 1996, Frege: Making Sense, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  5. ——, 2003, ‘Russell and Frege’, in Griffin 2003, pp. 128–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ——, 2004, ‘Carnap’s Conception of Explication: From Frege to Husserl?’, in S. Awodey and C. Klein, eds, Carnap Brought Home: The View from Jena, Chicago: Open Court, pp. 117–50.Google Scholar
  7. ——, 2005a, ‘Frege, Russell and Logicism’ [shortened and revised version of Beaney 2003], in Beaney and Reck 2005, Vol. I, pp. 213–40.Google Scholar
  8. ——, 2005b, ‘Sinn, Bedeutung and the Paradox of Analysis’, in Beaney and Reck 2005, Vol. IV, pp. 288–310.Google Scholar
  9. ——, 2006a, ‘Frege and the Role of Historical Elucidation: Methodology and the Foundations of Mathematics’, in J. Ferreirós and J. Gray, eds, The Architecture of Modern Mathematics: Essays in History and Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 49–71.Google Scholar
  10. ——, 2006b, ‘Soames on Philosophical Analysis’, Philosophical Books, 47, pp. 255–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. ——, 2007a, ed., The Analytic Turn: Analysis in Early Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. ——, 2007b, ‘Conceptions of Analysis in the Early Analytic and Phenomenological Traditions: Some Comparisons and Relationships’, in Beaney 2007a, pp. 196–216.Google Scholar
  13. ——, 2007c, ‘Analysis’, in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, online at: plato.stan-ford.edu/entries/analysisGoogle Scholar
  14. ——, forthcoming, ed., The Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Beaney, Michael and Reck, Erich H., 2005, eds, Gottlob Frege: Critical Assessments, 4 Vols., London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Bennett, Jonathan, 1971, Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Brandom, Robert B., 2002, Tales of the Mighty Dead, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Burge, Tyler, 2005, Truth, Thought, Reason: Essays on Frege, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, Richard, 1992, Truth and Historicity, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Candlish, Stewart, 2007, The Russell/Bradley Dispute and its Significance for Twentieth-Century Philosophy, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Carnap, Rudolf, 1928, Der logische Aufbau der Welt, Berlin-Schlachtensee: Weltkreis-Verlag, 2nd ed. Hamburg: Felix Meiner, 1961; tr. as Carnap 1967.Google Scholar
  22. —— 1934, Logische Syntax der Sprache, Wien: Julius Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. —— 1950, Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd ed., Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962.Google Scholar
  24. —— 1963, ‘Intellectual Autobiography’, in P.A. Schilpp, ed., The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap, La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, pp. 1–84.Google Scholar
  25. —— 1967, The Logical Structure of the World, tr. R.A. George, repr. Chicago: Open Court, 2003.Google Scholar
  26. Carus, A.W., 2007, Carnap and Twentieth-Century Thought: Explication as Enlightenment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cassirer, Ernst, 1902, Leibniz’ System in seinen wissenschaftlichen Grundlagen, Marburg: Elwert.Google Scholar
  28. Cohen, R.S., Feyerabend, P.K., and Wartofsky, M.W., 1976, eds, Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  29. Cohn, Jonas, 1908, Voraussetzungen und Ziele des Erkennens, Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.Google Scholar
  30. Conant, James, 2002, ‘The Method of the Tractatus’, in Reck 2002, pp. 374–462.Google Scholar
  31. Dummett, Michael, 1973, Frege: Philosophy of Language, London: Duckworth, 2nd ed. 1981.Google Scholar
  32. —— 1981, The Interpretation of Frege’s Philosophy, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  33. —— 1991a, Frege: Philosophy of Mathematics, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  34. —— 1991b, Frege and Other Philosophers, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Frege, Gottlob, 1879, Begriffsschrift, Halle: L. Nebert.Google Scholar
  36. —— 1884, Die Grundlagen der Arithmetik, Breslau: W. Koebner; selections tr. in Frege 1997, pp. 84–129.Google Scholar
  37. —— 1893, Grundgesetze der Arithmetik, begriffsschriftlich abgeleitet, Jena H. Pohle, Vol. I; most of Preface, Introd., and § § 1–7, 26–9, 32–3 tr. M. Beaney in Frege 1997, pp. 194–223.Google Scholar
  38. —— 1918, ‘Der Gedanke. Eine logische Untersuchung’, Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus, 1, pp. 58–77; tr. as ‘Thought’ in Frege 1997, pp. 325–45.Google Scholar
  39. —— 1997, The Frege Reader, ed. Michael Beaney, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  40. —— 2004, Frege’s Lectures on Logic: Carnap’s Student Notes, 1910–1914, tr. and ed. E.H. Reck and S. Awodey, Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  41. Gabriel, Gottfried, 2002, ‘Frege, Lotze, and the Continental Roots of Early Analytic Philosophy’, in Reck 2002, pp. 39–51; repr. in Beaney and Reck 2005, Vol. I, pp. 161–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. —— forthcoming, ‘Frege and the German Background to Analytic Philosophy’, in Beaney forthcoming.Google Scholar
  43. Glock, Hans-Johann, 2008, What is Analytic Philosophy?, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Glymour, Clark and Eberhardt, Frederick, 2008, ‘Hans Reichenbach’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, online at plato.stanford.edu/entries/reichenbach.Google Scholar
  45. Griffin, Nicholas, 2003, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Bertrand Russell, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hacker, P.M.S., 2006, ‘Soames’ History of Analytic Philosophy’, Philosophical Quarterly, 56, pp. 121–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hatfield, Gary, 2005, ‘The History of Philosophy as Philosophy’, in Sorell and Rogers 2005, pp. 83–128.Google Scholar
  48. —— this volume, ‘Psychology, Epistemology, and the Problem of the External World: Russell and Before’.Google Scholar
  49. Herbart, J.F., 1813, Lehrbuch zur Einleitung in die Philosophie, repr. Leipzig: Meiner, 1912.Google Scholar
  50. Hunter, Graeme, 1993, ‘Russell Making History: The Leibniz Book’, in A.D. Irvine and G.A. Wedeking, eds, Russell and Analytic Philosophy, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, pp. 397–414.Google Scholar
  51. Hylton, Peter, 1990, Russell, Idealism, and the Emergence of Analytic Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. —— 2005, Propositions, Functions, Analysis: Selected Essays on Russell’s Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. —— 2007, Quine, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  54. Kant, Immanuel, 1781/1787, Critique of Pure Reason, tr. and ed. P. Guyer and A. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  55. —— 1992, Lectures on Logic, tr. and ed. J. Michael Young, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Kremer, Michael, 2005, ‘Review of Scott Soames, Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century’, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, online at: http://ndpr.nd.edu/review. cfm?id=4061
  57. Kripke, Saul A., 1982, Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  58. Lakatos, Imre, 1970, ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Lakatos 1978, pp. 8–101.Google Scholar
  59. —— 1971, ‘History of Science and its Rational Reconstructions’, in Lakatos 1978, pp. 102–138.Google Scholar
  60. —— 1978, The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Philosophical Papers Vol. 1, in ed. John Worrall and Gregory Currie, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Linsky, Bernard, 2007, ‘Logical Analysis and Logical Construction’, in Beaney 2007a, pp. 107–22.Google Scholar
  62. —— forthcoming, ‘Russell’s Theory of Descriptions and the Idea of Logical Construction’, in Beaney forthcoming.Google Scholar
  63. Linsky, Bernard and Imaguire, Guido, 2005, eds, On Denoting: 1905–2005, München: Philosophia Verlag.Google Scholar
  64. Lotze, Hermann, 1843, Logik, Leipzig: Weidmann.Google Scholar
  65. MacIntyre, Alasdair, 1981, After Virtue, London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  66. Popper, Karl, 1934, Logik der Forschung, Vienna: Julius Springer; tr. as Popper 1959.Google Scholar
  67. —— 1959, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, repr. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
  68. Quine, W.V., 1948, ‘On what there is’, in Quine 1961, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
  69. —— 1953, ‘Two Dogmas of Empiricism’, in Quine 1961, pp. 20–46.Google Scholar
  70. —— 1958, ‘Speaking of Objects’, in Quine 1969, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
  71. —— 1961, From a Logical Point of View, 2nd ed., rev., Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press; 1st ed. 1953.Google Scholar
  72. —— 1966, ‘Existence and Quantification’, in Quine 1969, pp. 91–113.Google Scholar
  73. —— 1968, ‘Epistemology Naturalized’, in Quine 1969, pp. 69–90.Google Scholar
  74. —— 1969, Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Reck, Erich H., 2002, ed., From Frege to Wittgenstein: Perspectives on Early Analytic Philosophy, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Reck, Erich H., 2005, ‘Frege’s Natural Numbers: Motivations and Modifications’, in Beaney and Reck 2005, Vol. III, pp. 270–301.Google Scholar
  77. —— 2007, ‘Frege-Russell Numbers: Analysis or Explication?’, in Beaney 2007a, pp. 33–50.Google Scholar
  78. Reichenbach, Hans, 1935, ‘Über Induktion und Wahrscheinlichkeit. Bemerkungen zu Karl Poppers Logik der Forschung’, Erkenntnis, 5, no. 4, pp. 267–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. —— 1938, Experience and Prediction, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  80. Richardson, Alan, 1998, Carnap’s Construction of the World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  81. —— 2006, ‘Rational Reconstruction’, in S. Sarkar and J. Pfeifer, eds., The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, London: Routledge, pp. 681–5.Google Scholar
  82. Rorty, Richard, 1980, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  83. —— 1984, ‘The Historiography of Philosophy: Four Genres’, in Rorty et al. 1984, pp. 49–75.Google Scholar
  84. —— 2005, ‘How many Grains make a Heap?’, London Review of Books, 27, No. 2 (20 January 2005).Google Scholar
  85. Rorty, Richard, Schneewind, J. B., and Skinner, Quentin, 1984, eds, Philosophy in History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Russell, Bertrand, 1900, A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz, 2nd ed. 1937, repr. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
  87. —— 1914, ‘The Relation of Sense-Data to Physics’, in Mysticism and Logic, London: George Allen and Unwin, 1917, pp. 108–31; orig. publ. in Scientia 1914.Google Scholar
  88. —— 1927, The Analysis of Matter, London: Kegan Paul; repr. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
  89. —— 1959, My Philosophical Development, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  90. Skinner, Quentin, 1969, ‘Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas’, History and Theory, 8, pp. 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Sluga, Hans, 1980, Gottlob Frege, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  92. Soames, Scott, 2003, Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century, 2 Vols., Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Sorell, Tom and Rogers, G.A.J., 2005, eds, Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Strawson, P.F., 1966, The Bounds of Sense, London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  95. Urmson, J.O., 1956, Philosophical Analysis: Its Development between the Two World Wars, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  96. Weiner, Joan, 1990, Frege in Perspective, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  97. —— 2005, ‘On Fregean Elucidation’, in Beaney and Reck 2005, Vol. IV, pp. 197–214.Google Scholar
  98. Windelband, Wilhelm, 1884, ‘Kritische oder genetische Methode?’, in Präludien. Aufsätze und Reden zur Philosophie und ihrer Geschichte, 5th ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1915, Vol. 2, pp. 99–135.Google Scholar
  99. Ziehen, Theodor, 1914, Zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Erkenntnistheorie, Wiesbaden: Bergmann.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Michael Beaney 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Beaney

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations