Volume Introduction – Method, Science and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Analytic Philosophy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/jhap.v6i3.3430Abstract
Introduction to the Special Volume, “Method, Science and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Analytic Philosophy,” edited by Scott Edgar and Lydia Patton.At its core, analytic philosophy concerns urgent questions about philosophy’s relation to the formal and empirical sciences, questions about philosophy’s relation to psychology and the social sciences, and ultimately questions about philosophy’s place in a broader cultural landscape. This picture of analytic philosophy shapes this collection’s focus on the history of the philosophy of mathematics, physics, and psychology. The following essays uncover, reflect on, and exemplify modes of philosophy that are engaged with these allied disciplines. They make the case that, to the extent that analytic philosophers are still concerned with philosophy’s ties to these disciplines, we would do well to pay attention to neo-Kantian views on those ties.
References
Banks, Erik C., 2018. “Grete Hermann as Neo-Kantian Philosopher of Space and Time Representation.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 244–63.
Beaney, Michael, 2002. “Decompositions and Transformations: Conceptions of Analysis in the Early Analytic and Phenomenological Traditions.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 40: 53–99.
———, ed., 2007. The Analytic Turn: Analysis in Early Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology. New York: Routledge.
Beiser, Frederick C., 2014. The Genesis of Neo-Kantianism: 1796–1880. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biagioli, Francesca, 2016. Space, Number, and Geometry from Helmholtz to Cassirer. Cham: Springer.
———, 2018. “Articulating Space in Terms of Transformation Groups: Helmholtz and Cassirer.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 115–31.
Cantù, Paola, 2018. “The Epistemological Question of the Applicability of Mathematics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 95–114.
De Kock, Liesbet, 2018. “Historicizing Hermann von Helmholtz’s Psychology of Differentiation.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 42–62.
Dummett, Michael, 1993. Origins of Analytical Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Edgar, Scott, 2008. “Paul Natorp and the Emergence of Anti-Psychologism in the Nineteenth Century.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 39: 54–65.
———, 2015. “The Physiology of the Sense Organs and Early Neo-Kantian Conceptions of Objectivity: Helmholtz, Lange, Liebmann.” In Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives from Science and Technology Studies, edited by Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson, and Jonathan Y. Tsou, pp. 101–22. Cham: Springer.
Floyd, Juliet, 2009 “Recent Themes in the History of Early Analytic Philosophy.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47: 157–200.
Folina, Janet, 2018. “After Non-Euclidean Geometry: Intuition, Truth, and the Autonomy of Mathematics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 163–81.
Friedman, Michael, 1999. Reconsidering Logical Positivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 2000. A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger. Peru, IL: Open Court.
———, 2001. The Dynamics of Reason. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Hatfield, Gary, 2018. “Helmholtz and Philosophy: Science, Perception, and Metaphysics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 11–41.
Heis, Jeremy, 2010. “ ‘Critical Philosophy Begins at the Very Point Where Logistic Leaves Off’: Cassirer’s Response to Frege and Russell.” Perspectives on Science 18: 383–408.
Kaila, Eino, 1941. “On the Concept of Reality in Physical Science: Second Contribution to Logical Empiricism.” In Reality and Experience: Four Philosophical Essays, translated by A. Kirschenmann and P. Kirschenmann, edited by R. S. Cohen, pp. 126–258. Dordrecht: Riedel, 1979.
Lapointe, Sandra, 2002. "Substitution: An Additional Conception of Analysis in Early Analytic and Phenomenological Traditions?" Southern Journal of Philosophy 40: 101–13.
Matherne, Samantha, 2018. “Cassirer’s Psychology of Relations: From the Psychology of Mathematics and Natural Science to the Psychology of Culture.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 132–62.
Neuber, Matthias, 2018. “Perception and Coincidence in Helmholtz’s Theory of Measurement.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 79–94.
Patton, Lydia, 2014. “Hermann von Helmholtz.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/hermann-helmholtz/, accessed 20 November 2017.
Reichenbach, Hans, 1951. The Rise of Scientific Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Richardson, Alan, 1998. Carnap’s Construction of the World: The Aufbau and the Emergence of Logical Empiricism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 2008. “Scientific Philosophy as a Topic for History of Science.” Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 99: 88–96.
Rorty, Richard, 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Russell, Bertrand, 1897. An Essay on the Foundations of Geometry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ryckman, Thomas, 2018. “Cassirer and Dirac on a Symbolic Method: A Confluence of Opposites.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 213–43.
Schiemer, Georg, 2018. “Cassirer and the Structural Turn in Modern Geometry.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 182–212.
Soames, Scott, 2014. The Analytic Tradition in Philosophy, vol. 1, The Founding Giants. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tracz, Brian, 2018. “Helmholtz on Perceptual Properties.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 63–78.
Yap, Audrey, 2017. “Dedekind and Cassirer on Mathematical Concept Formation.” Philosophia Mathematica 25: 369–89.
Beaney, Michael, 2002. “Decompositions and Transformations: Conceptions of Analysis in the Early Analytic and Phenomenological Traditions.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 40: 53–99.
———, ed., 2007. The Analytic Turn: Analysis in Early Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology. New York: Routledge.
Beiser, Frederick C., 2014. The Genesis of Neo-Kantianism: 1796–1880. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biagioli, Francesca, 2016. Space, Number, and Geometry from Helmholtz to Cassirer. Cham: Springer.
———, 2018. “Articulating Space in Terms of Transformation Groups: Helmholtz and Cassirer.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 115–31.
Cantù, Paola, 2018. “The Epistemological Question of the Applicability of Mathematics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 95–114.
De Kock, Liesbet, 2018. “Historicizing Hermann von Helmholtz’s Psychology of Differentiation.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 42–62.
Dummett, Michael, 1993. Origins of Analytical Philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Edgar, Scott, 2008. “Paul Natorp and the Emergence of Anti-Psychologism in the Nineteenth Century.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 39: 54–65.
———, 2015. “The Physiology of the Sense Organs and Early Neo-Kantian Conceptions of Objectivity: Helmholtz, Lange, Liebmann.” In Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives from Science and Technology Studies, edited by Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson, and Jonathan Y. Tsou, pp. 101–22. Cham: Springer.
Floyd, Juliet, 2009 “Recent Themes in the History of Early Analytic Philosophy.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47: 157–200.
Folina, Janet, 2018. “After Non-Euclidean Geometry: Intuition, Truth, and the Autonomy of Mathematics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 163–81.
Friedman, Michael, 1999. Reconsidering Logical Positivism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 2000. A Parting of the Ways: Carnap, Cassirer and Heidegger. Peru, IL: Open Court.
———, 2001. The Dynamics of Reason. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Hatfield, Gary, 2018. “Helmholtz and Philosophy: Science, Perception, and Metaphysics.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 11–41.
Heis, Jeremy, 2010. “ ‘Critical Philosophy Begins at the Very Point Where Logistic Leaves Off’: Cassirer’s Response to Frege and Russell.” Perspectives on Science 18: 383–408.
Kaila, Eino, 1941. “On the Concept of Reality in Physical Science: Second Contribution to Logical Empiricism.” In Reality and Experience: Four Philosophical Essays, translated by A. Kirschenmann and P. Kirschenmann, edited by R. S. Cohen, pp. 126–258. Dordrecht: Riedel, 1979.
Lapointe, Sandra, 2002. "Substitution: An Additional Conception of Analysis in Early Analytic and Phenomenological Traditions?" Southern Journal of Philosophy 40: 101–13.
Matherne, Samantha, 2018. “Cassirer’s Psychology of Relations: From the Psychology of Mathematics and Natural Science to the Psychology of Culture.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 132–62.
Neuber, Matthias, 2018. “Perception and Coincidence in Helmholtz’s Theory of Measurement.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 79–94.
Patton, Lydia, 2014. “Hermann von Helmholtz.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/hermann-helmholtz/, accessed 20 November 2017.
Reichenbach, Hans, 1951. The Rise of Scientific Philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Richardson, Alan, 1998. Carnap’s Construction of the World: The Aufbau and the Emergence of Logical Empiricism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
———, 2008. “Scientific Philosophy as a Topic for History of Science.” Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 99: 88–96.
Rorty, Richard, 1979. Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Russell, Bertrand, 1897. An Essay on the Foundations of Geometry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ryckman, Thomas, 2018. “Cassirer and Dirac on a Symbolic Method: A Confluence of Opposites.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 213–43.
Schiemer, Georg, 2018. “Cassirer and the Structural Turn in Modern Geometry.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 182–212.
Soames, Scott, 2014. The Analytic Tradition in Philosophy, vol. 1, The Founding Giants. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Tracz, Brian, 2018. “Helmholtz on Perceptual Properties.” In Method, Science, and Mathematics: Neo-Kantianism and Early Analytic Philosophy, special volume, edited by S. Edgar and L. Patton. Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy 6: 63–78.
Yap, Audrey, 2017. “Dedekind and Cassirer on Mathematical Concept Formation.” Philosophia Mathematica 25: 369–89.
Downloads
Published
2018-02-05
Issue
Section
Articles
License
The Public Knowledge Project recommends the use of the Creative Commons license. The Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy requires authors to agree to a Creative Commons Attribution /Non-commercial license. Authors who publish with the Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC license.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
