Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You and Your Team.

Learn More →

Historicity, Critique, and the Problem of Naturalism in Neuropragmatism

Historicity, Critique, and the Problem of Naturalism in Neuropragmatism I argue that neuropragmatism holds to a problematic version of Dewey’s principle of continuity, and thus risks the melioristic dimensions of the neurophilosophical turn proposed for pragmatism. Therefore, firstly, I try to show that the neuropragmatist does hold this principle. Secondly, I give an alternative (historicist) account. Thirdly, I argue that the neuropragmatists’ interpretation of the principle of continuity is problematic because it threatens to undermine their melioristic concerns because of their explanatory commitments. This historicist pragmatist order of explanation aims at avoiding this problem while maintaining meliorism. I conclude by arguing that this is a mistake in the conflation of two distinct stories, one ethical, and the other ontological. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Contemporary Pragmatism Brill

Historicity, Critique, and the Problem of Naturalism in Neuropragmatism

Contemporary Pragmatism , Volume 14 (1): 16 – May 30, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/historicity-critique-and-the-problem-of-naturalism-in-neuropragmatism-K2FI2MqEK0
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
1572-3429
eISSN
1875-8185
DOI
10.1163/18758185-01401003
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

I argue that neuropragmatism holds to a problematic version of Dewey’s principle of continuity, and thus risks the melioristic dimensions of the neurophilosophical turn proposed for pragmatism. Therefore, firstly, I try to show that the neuropragmatist does hold this principle. Secondly, I give an alternative (historicist) account. Thirdly, I argue that the neuropragmatists’ interpretation of the principle of continuity is problematic because it threatens to undermine their melioristic concerns because of their explanatory commitments. This historicist pragmatist order of explanation aims at avoiding this problem while maintaining meliorism. I conclude by arguing that this is a mistake in the conflation of two distinct stories, one ethical, and the other ontological.

Journal

Contemporary PragmatismBrill

Published: May 30, 2017

References