Philosophy Is Not a Science: Margaret Macdonald on the Nature of Philosophical Theories

Margaret Macdonald was at the institutional heart of analytic philosophy in Britain in the mid-twentieth century. However, her views on the nature of philosophical theories diverge quite considerably from those of many of her contemporaries. In this article, I focus on Macdonald’s provocative 1953 paper, “Linguistic Philosophy and Perception,” in which she argues that the value of philosophical theories is more akin to that of poetry or art than science or mathematics. I do so for two reasons. First, it reveals just how far Macdonald’s metaphilosophical views diverged from those of many of her contemporaries. Second, the discussion in her article preempts recent literature on the nature of philosophical inquiry and the efficacy of philosophical arguments. Indeed, Macdonald’s paper is just as likely to provoke discussion today as it was in the 1950s.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
HOPOS The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science
Published
2024-08-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1086/731677
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Philosophy, Science, and History
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
18.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Philosophy Is Not a Science: Margaret Macdonald on the Nature of Philosophical Theories

Peter West
3 citations
HOPOS The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science
Philosophy, Science, and History
18.13
article

Philosophy Is Not a Science: Margaret Macdonald on the Nature of Philosophical Theories

Peter West
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Margaret Macdonald was at the institutional heart of analytic philosophy in Britain in the mid-twentieth century. However, her views on the nature of philosophical theories diverge quite considerably from those of many of her contemporaries. In this article, I focus on Macdonald’s provocative 1953 paper, “Linguistic Philosophy and Perception,” in which she argues that the value of philosophical theories is more akin to that of poetry or art than science or mathematics. I do so for two reasons. First, it reveals just how far Macdonald’s metaphilosophical views diverged from those of many of her contemporaries. Second, the discussion in her article preempts recent literature on the nature of philosophical inquiry and the efficacy of philosophical arguments. Indeed, Macdonald’s paper is just as likely to provoke discussion today as it was in the 1950s.

HOPOS The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of ScienceVol. 14(2)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Philosophy, Science, and History
18.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.