Reviews for John McDowell

The average rating for John McDowell based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2012-10-31 00:00:00 Herb Harris I think this man is fundamentally misguided in everything he writes and teaches. He tries to make common sense into philosophy, and while it is not convincing, it is kind of fun to read to see how wrong he can be. This book is probably the best because it is one of his earliest, and sets out the tenets of this thought. Almost every other book of his after this reiterates this theory in one way or another.

Review # 2 was written on 2015-08-23 00:00:00 Jack Harris Probably one of the most comprehensive overviews of Searle's view on mind and language and the relationship between the two. It does not go into Searle's views on the relationship between facts and assertions (on the one hand) or beliefs and society (on the other) and so it is not totally inclusive of Searle's broad philosophical views. Still, it is pretty substantial. There are a number of challenges with reading the book, which is that Searle is not particularly clear with regard to where he stands relative to the historical discussion. Frege, who plays a major role in Searle's discussion, has very clear views about the role of psychology in a theory of meaning, and Searle seems to disagree with Frege, but never makes this specific. I worry that this leads to some confusion about what Searle's views are, because some of those claims are unclear. It is also a very technical view, though Searle is a much better writer than others in technical philosophy. If I were building a curriculum on Searle's philosophy (not totally out of the realm of possibility) I probably would assign this as a central reading; if I were to put together a syllabus on modern philosophy of language, I would probably use some excerpts, but have to make some careful choices about presentation. My advice for reading it is more or less the same. Worthwhile read, but one to read carefully or not at all.