The forest and the trees - Reply to Siegel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Decency requires that a discussion as lengthy as the preceding be handily brought to a close. The seriousness of Siegel's complaints against me do, however, call for a response. In what follows I will address what I take to be Siegel's main criticisms, roughly in the order that they are presented. My responses will be limited to, at most, a few paragraphs. They can do no more than indicate how I would counter the thrust of his critical remarks. As both Siegel and myself readily admit, our positions exhibit deep agreements. As I shall attempt to indicate in what follows, much of what Siegel sees in my arguments as evidence of confusion, or worse, may point to equally deep differences of opinion. Our agreements, as he graciously acknowledges, are relevant to issues at the center of recent philosophy, but, as should be apparent from what follows, so are our possible differences.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)285-291
Number of pages7
JournalStudies in Philosophy and Education
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Sep 1992

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The forest and the trees - Reply to Siegel'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this