Rules, Regression and the ‘Background’: Dreyfus, Heidegger and McDowell

McManus, Denis

doi:10.1111/j.1468-0378.2007.00255.x

Cited by 31 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In appearing it gives itself an aspect, dokei.' We often conflate this aspect with the thing itself, initiating feuds as to what is the case (McManus, 2007), when the giving of an aspect has a lightness of bearing; the 'is' lies ready for "diverse uses" (Heidegger, 1953/9: 91), Take a mundane thing, such as a manager seeing a line on a graph plotting the sale of cigarettes whose trajectory is upwards from lower left to upper right. She might recognize a representation of improvement and use the graph comfortably, without hesitation, because she has also become familiar with the tools with which such graphs are presented and drawn and with the contexts in which they are used.…”

Section: Aspect Seeing and Ereignismentioning

confidence: 99%

Wittgenstein, Heidegger and Drawing Lines in Organization Studies

Holt

Mueller

2011

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We argue that when considering questions of ontology in organization studies, much can be gained by issuing reminders of the normative conditions by which meanings are fixed. In attempting to fix meaning and the conditions of meaning epistemologically, however, critical realist and social constructionist positions tend to eschew such normative considerations and assert instead how the fixity of meaning is related to causal powers on the one hand, or to discursive habit on the other. In both cases there is an urge to extend from, and somehow complete, organizational experience by drawing what we call general lines. The critical realists do this by distinguishing the necessary from the contingent, the social constructionists by arguing language goes all the way through making such a distinction impossible. Enlisting arguments and concepts from Heidegger and Wittgenstein, as well as discussing the illustrative case of the rights and wrongs of cigarette production, we suggest an alternative normative framing for questions of meaning in which necessity and contingency cohabit, something we liken to the drawing of local lines.

show abstract

Section: Aspect Seeing and Ereignismentioning

confidence: 99%

Wittgenstein, Heidegger and Drawing Lines in Organization Studies

Holt

Mueller

2011

Organization Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the second level, in a way that I find particularly problematic but will not explore here, Dreyfus wants to make use of certain findings of neuroscience to provide an empirical basis for his views on rationality and embodied coping. For an excellent article that was written slightly before this debate but presages many of these issues, see McManus (2008). 20 This aspect of McDowell's view of philosophy is substantially inspired by so-called "therapeutic" or "quietist" readings of Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations.…”

Section: Dreyfus and Mcdowell On Action Concepts And Coping Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Habitus, Coping Practices, and the Search for the Ground of Action

Cahill

2016

Philosophy of the Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article shows how in Outline of a Theory of Practice Pierre Bourdieu relies on a kind of philosophical myth in his attempt to dispel structuralist accounts of action. Section 2 is a summary of Bourdieu’s use of the concept of habitus against intellectualism and structuralism. Schatzki’s criticism of Bourdieu from a purportedly Wittgensteinian perspective is also examined. Section 3 relates Bourdieu’s use of habitus to a debate between Hubert Dreyfus and John McDowell about the role of concepts in action. Section 4 shows how McDowell’s rejection of foundationalist elements in Dreyfus’s account of action also raises problems for Bourdieu’s account of action. Diamond’s recent criticism of Winch is shown to have an interesting connection to this debate.

show abstract

“…(For an indication of how this case might be made, cf. McManus : Section 4 forthcoming‐a Section 9.2, and forthcoming‐c. )…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%