Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Lewis and Quine in context

View through CrossRef
Abstract Robert Sinclair’s Quine, Conceptual Pragmatism, and the Analytic-Synthetic Distinction persuasively argues that Quine’s epistemology was deeply influenced by C. I. Lewis’s pragmatism. Sinclair’s account raises the question why Quine himself frequently downplayed Lewis’s influence. Looking back, Quine has always said that Rudolf Carnap was his “greatest teacher” and that his 1933 meeting with the German philosopher was his “first experience of sustained intellectual engagement with anyone of an older generation” (1970, 41; 1985, 97-8, my emphasis). Quine’s autobiographies contain only a handful of biographical references to Lewis and he regularly soft-pedaled the latter’s influence in private correspondence. In this note, I discuss some archival evidence that helps us better understand Quine’s reluctance to acknowledge Lewis’s influence. I contextualize the relation between Lewis and Quine and argue that the latter viewed his teacher as a retrograde force in modern epistemology, impeding the more rigorous approach that Carnap had been developing in Europe. Next, I briefly discuss Lewis’s contribution to the development of scientific philosophy in the United States and argue that Quine underestimated his teacher’s role in this process. In doing so, I argue that Quine’s zealous commitment to Carnap’s approach negatively affected his assessment of Lewis’s influence, thereby supplementing Sinclair’s praiseworthy reconstruction with an explanation of why Quine himself underestimated Lewis’s role.
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Title: Lewis and Quine in context
Description:
Abstract Robert Sinclair’s Quine, Conceptual Pragmatism, and the Analytic-Synthetic Distinction persuasively argues that Quine’s epistemology was deeply influenced by C.
I.
Lewis’s pragmatism.
Sinclair’s account raises the question why Quine himself frequently downplayed Lewis’s influence.
Looking back, Quine has always said that Rudolf Carnap was his “greatest teacher” and that his 1933 meeting with the German philosopher was his “first experience of sustained intellectual engagement with anyone of an older generation” (1970, 41; 1985, 97-8, my emphasis).
Quine’s autobiographies contain only a handful of biographical references to Lewis and he regularly soft-pedaled the latter’s influence in private correspondence.
In this note, I discuss some archival evidence that helps us better understand Quine’s reluctance to acknowledge Lewis’s influence.
I contextualize the relation between Lewis and Quine and argue that the latter viewed his teacher as a retrograde force in modern epistemology, impeding the more rigorous approach that Carnap had been developing in Europe.
Next, I briefly discuss Lewis’s contribution to the development of scientific philosophy in the United States and argue that Quine underestimated his teacher’s role in this process.
In doing so, I argue that Quine’s zealous commitment to Carnap’s approach negatively affected his assessment of Lewis’s influence, thereby supplementing Sinclair’s praiseworthy reconstruction with an explanation of why Quine himself underestimated Lewis’s role.

Related Results

Quine y la ontología
Quine y la ontología
Resumen La ontología jugó un rol muy amplio en la filosofía de Quine y fue una de sus mayores preocupaciones desde el inicio de los años 30 hasta el final de su vida. Su trabajo s...
Quine, Willard Van Orman (1908–2000)
Quine, Willard Van Orman (1908–2000)
Quine is the foremost representative of naturalism in the second half of the twentieth century. His naturalism consists of an insistence upon a close connection or alliance between...
W. V. Quine and David Lewis: Structural (Epistemological) Humility
W. V. Quine and David Lewis: Structural (Epistemological) Humility
This chapter argues that W. V. Quine and D. K. Lewis, despite their differences and their different receptions, came to a common intellectual destination: epistemological structura...
Naturalizing Russell
Naturalizing Russell
Abstract This chapter examines Bertrand Russell’s influence on W. V. Quine, specifically through the three areas of logic, ontology, and epistemology. These three...
Quine's Scientific Realism Revisited
Quine's Scientific Realism Revisited
AbstractIn order to reconnect Quine's views to the current debate on scientific realism, I reframe Quine's scientific realism into a semantic, a metaphysical, and an epistemologica...
Naturalizing Metaphysics
Naturalizing Metaphysics
Quine’s negative characterization of naturalism as the rejection of first philosophy invites the question of why he believes that first philosophy ought to be dismissed. This chapt...
Quine vs. Quine
Quine vs. Quine
How does Quine fare in the first decades of the twenty-first century? This chapter examines a cluster of Quinean theses that are especially fruitful in meeting some of the current ...
Quine, Structure, and Ontology
Quine, Structure, and Ontology
Contemporary work on ontology, logic, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of science, and philosophy of language still owes much to W.V. Quine. Nevertheless his views are now oft...

Back to Top