Recovering the Adventure of Ideas: In Defense of Metaphysics as Revisable, Systematic, Speculative Philosophy

Journal of Speculative Philosophy 29 (4):437-456 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

ABSTRACT My aim in this article is twofold. First, I hope to show that, despite its seeming rehabilitation, metaphysics as systematic, speculative philosophy is no less threatened. Second, I will argue that metaphysics as systematic, speculative philosophy is ultimately revisable. That is, metaphysics is not the aim at a closed system of apodictic truths but, rather, an open-ended, fallibilistic pursuit of ever-more-adequate accounts of reality. Specifically, building on the work of Charles Sanders Peirce and Alfred North Whitehead, I will argue that we should conceive of metaphysics not as the quest for absolute certainty but as “working hypothesis.” Thus, the first part will be largely historical and critical, and the second part will be positive and exploratory.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,173

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-12-02

Downloads
57 (#376,004)

6 months
10 (#402,856)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Brian G. Henning
Gonzaga University

Citations of this work

On the Systematicity of Academic Philosophy.David Alvargonzález - 2020 - Philosophical Investigations 44 (3):237-253.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references