King's College London

Research portal

Two dogmas of analytic historiography

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Original languageEnglish
JournalBritish Journal for the History of Philosophy
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2020

King's Authors

Abstract

Starting from an analogy with Quine’s two dogmas of empiricism, I offer a (neo-Kantian) critique of two dogmas of analytic historiography: the belief in a cleavage between the justification of a philosophical claim and an account of its genesis and the belief in rational reconstructionism. I take Russell’s rational reconstruction of Leibniz’s philosophy as my detailed example.

View graph of relations

© 2018 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454