Read a paper the other day which I really enjoyed and wanted to share the
reference here:

*Danielle Macbeth, "Varieties of Analytic Pragmatism", Philosophia 40
(1):27-39.*

*http://philpapers.org/rec/MACVOA*

Basically Macbeth dissects the version of pragmatism put forward by Robert
Brandom in his recent John Locke lectures, and argues that what he is doing
with logical diagrams is not at all what Kant and Peirce were doing.
Previously she had mainly worked on logical diagrams in Frege, so I'm
interested that she is turning to Peirce.

Anyway here is the official abstract:

"In his Locke Lectures Brandom proposes to extend what he calls the project
of analysis to encompass various relationships between meaning and use. As
the traditional project of analysis sought to clarify various logical
relations between vocabularies so Brandom’s extended project seeks to
clarify various pragmatically mediated semantic relations between
vocabularies. The point of the exercise in both cases is to achieve what
Brandom thinks of as algebraic understanding. Because the pragmatist
critique of the traditional project of analysis was precisely to deny that
such understanding is appropriate to the case of natural language, the very
idea of an analytic pragmatism is called into question by that critique. My
aim is to clarify the prospects for Brandom’s project, or at least
something in the vicinity of that project, through a comparison of it with
what I will suggest we can think of as Kant’s analytic pragmatism as
developed by Peirce."

Cheers, Cathy

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the PEIRCE-L 
listserv.  To remove yourself from this list, send a message to 
lists...@listserv.iupui.edu with the line "SIGNOFF PEIRCE-L" in the body of the 
message.  To post a message to the list, send it to PEIRCE-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU

Reply via email to