Literature & knowledge
Royal Institute of Philosophy
Literature and Knowledge
Author(s): Catherine Wilson
Source: Philosophy, Vol. 58, No. 226 (Oct., 1983), pp. 489-496
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3750861 .
Accessed: 17/10/2013 15:08
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp .
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Cambridge University Press and Royal Institute of Philosophy are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.229.14.7 on Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:08:31 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
and Knowledge
Literature
CATHERINE
WILSON
of
There is probablyno subjectin the philosophy artwhichhas prompted than the questionof the 'cognitivevalue' of more impassionedtheorizing critichas stated,'I do not disworksof art. 'In the end', one influential betweenscience and art exceptas regardsmethod.Both provide tinguish to and both are indispensable a completeunderus with a view of reality between If of standing the universe.'1 a man is not preparedto distinguish science and art one may well wonderwhat he is preparedto distinguish of it between,but in all fairness should be pointedout that the writings contain equally strenuous statementsof doctrine. For anti-cognitivists which are 'true' if
I. A. Richards,poetryconsistsof 'pseudo-statements' attitudes whichon other or they'suit and servesome attitude linktogether
Literature and Knowledge
Author(s): Catherine Wilson
Source: Philosophy, Vol. 58, No. 226 (Oct., 1983), pp. 489-496
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal Institute of Philosophy
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3750861 .
Accessed: 17/10/2013 15:08
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp .
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Cambridge University Press and Royal Institute of Philosophy are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 132.229.14.7 on Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:08:31 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
and Knowledge
Literature
CATHERINE
WILSON
of
There is probablyno subjectin the philosophy artwhichhas prompted than the questionof the 'cognitivevalue' of more impassionedtheorizing critichas stated,'I do not disworksof art. 'In the end', one influential betweenscience and art exceptas regardsmethod.Both provide tinguish to and both are indispensable a completeunderus with a view of reality between If of standing the universe.'1 a man is not preparedto distinguish science and art one may well wonderwhat he is preparedto distinguish of it between,but in all fairness should be pointedout that the writings contain equally strenuous statementsof doctrine. For anti-cognitivists which are 'true' if
I. A. Richards,poetryconsistsof 'pseudo-statements' attitudes whichon other or they'suit and servesome attitude linktogether