Philosophical Writing [Book Review]

Review of Metaphysics 38 (4):902-903 (1985)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Richetti finds Locke, Berkeley, and Hume to be appropriate for a literary study on his claim that for these three philosophers writing was itself a special problem. Since their works were still addressed to a general, not a professional audience, each gave much consideration to the manner of the presentation of his thought, attempting to close the emerging gap between literary creation and technical writing. Further, because these authors dealt in the abstruse, sometimes in the paradoxical, finding a literary voice that establishes community with the reader without abandoning the demands of philosophic discourse posed a sizable challenge.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,636

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Philosophical Writing. [REVIEW]Carolyn Richardson - 2007 - Dialogue 46 (2):396-399.
Philosophical Writing: Locke, Berkeley, Hume.John J. Richetti - 1983 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 18 (3):184-187.
Philosophical Writing. [REVIEW]Keith Burgess-Jackson - 1997 - Teaching Philosophy 20 (4):430-437.
Philosophical Writing. [REVIEW]James Thomas - 2006 - Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):173-175.
Philosophical Writing.Henry More & Flora Isabel Machinnoe - 1925 - Annalen der Philosophie Und Philosophischen Kritik 5 (5):144-144.
Ten commandments of philosophical writing.Adrian M. S. Piper - 1992 - Adrian Piper Research Archive Foundation Berlin.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
45 (#496,265)

6 months
5 (#1,056,575)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references