Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVrahimis, Andreasen
dc.contributor.editorHagengruber, Ruthen
dc.contributor.editorWaithe, Mary Ellenen
dc.creatorVrahimis, Andreasen
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-16T09:10:04Z
dc.date.available2024-01-16T09:10:04Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.urihttp://gnosis.library.ucy.ac.cy/handle/7/66008en
dc.identifier.urihttp://gnosis.library.ucy.ac.cy/handle/7/66008
dc.description.abstractIn her earliest writings, Stebbing (1913, 1914) broadly defines “voluntarism” as the thesis that “will is more fundamental than intellect” (1914: 13), which can have psychological, metaphysical, and epistemological manifestations. Voluntarists tend to reject determinism in preference to “radical contingency” (4). They also criticise the intellect’s limited epistemic capacities, appealing instead to various non-intellectual methods for acquiring knowledge. Stebbing (1914: 130-131, 161-162) distinguishes three types of voluntarist methodologies: (i) appeals to intuition (e.g. within French “spiritualism”), (ii) appeals to extra-rational choice (e.g. Pascal’s wager, James’ “will to believe”, or Renouvier’s “moral method” (Stebbing 1914: 161)), and (iii) appeals to action (e.g. Séailles’ and Guyau’s “philosophie des idées-forces”). In discussing voluntarism, Stebbing responds both to debates concerning the Pragmatist critique of “intellectualism” (Kremer 2017), and also to Bergson’s sudden rise to fame in the Anglophone world after his 1911 visits to England (Stebbing 1914; v; see Vrahimis 2022). In his Anglophone reception (e.g. James 1909; Russell 1912), Bergson was presented as the American Pragmatists’ “anti-intellectualist” ally. Stebbing (1914, 50-54) criticised the caricature of Bergson as an “anti-intellectualist”, a term which she finds “so ambiguous as to be practically useless as a label” (113)). She also argued that Bergson’s views clash with certain Pragmatist tenets, e.g. in the theory of truth (Stebbing 1913; 1914: 58-83). While conceding that both Bergson and the Pragmatists subscribe to forms of Voluntarism, Stebbing rightly argues that Bergson’s work should be understood within the specific context of the “spiritualist” strand of the French Voluntarist tradition. Anglophone scholarship only recently started to acknowledge what Stebbing demonstrated as early as 1912 (e.g. Sinclair 2015: 162; Dunham 2020: 268; Viola 2020; Watt 2021): that Bergson’s work is not, as James (1909) thought, the unprecedented product of a solitary creative genius, but rather a continuation of nineteenth-century French philosophy.en
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.rightsOpen Accessen
dc.sourceEncyclopedia of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophersen
dc.source.urihttps://historyofwomenphilosophers.org/ecc/#hwpsen
dc.subjectL. Susan Stebbingen
dc.subjectVoluntarismen
dc.subjectIntellectualismen
dc.subjectPragmatismen
dc.subjectIntuitionen
dc.subjectHenri Bergsonen
dc.subjectMaine de Biranen
dc.subjectFelix Ravaissonen
dc.subjectWilliam Jamesen
dc.subjectBertrand Russellen
dc.titleVoluntarism in Susan Stebbing (1885–1943)en
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bookChapteren
dc.author.faculty008 Φιλοσοφική Σχολή / Faculty of Letters
dc.author.departmentΤμήμα Κλασικών Σπουδών και Φιλοσοφίας / Department of Classics and Philosophy
dc.type.uhtypeBook Chapteren
dc.contributor.orcidVrahimis, Andreas [0000-0002-3409-6034]
dc.type.subtypePUBLISHER_EDITORSHIPen
dc.gnosis.orcid0000-0002-3409-6034


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record