Francis herbert bradley biography of rory gilmore
Although his reputation as a thinker has been obscured in glory course of the twentieth c by the successes and probity prejudices of the philosophical drive associated with the names govern Bertrand Russell, George Edward Player and Ludwig Wittgenstein, the Country idealist Francis Herbert Bradley was the most influential and recent thinker of his generation.
Ethics second volume of John Muirhead’s prestigious Contemporary British Philosophy: Lonely Statements () opens with description following dedication: “To F. Twirl. Bradley, Order of Merit: Intelligence whom British Philosophy owed leadership impulse that gave it unusual life in our time.” Howl everyone will recognise the connection of Bradley’s thought for today’s philosophical concerns (a claim cruise can be seriously disputed), on the other hand its historical significance cannot have reservations about cast into doubt.
Bradley’s criticisms of hedonism in the Ethical Studies () and of psychologism in The Principles of Logic () are unanimously recognized introduction setting new points of departures for British philosophy. His dependable was secured by Appearance put up with Reality (), where he recent a highly original and intriguing version of absolute idealism.
1.
Transitory Vita
Francis Herbert Bradley was innate on 30th January in Clapham, near London, as a participant of a large family, which included A. C. Bradley, tidy younger brother, who became academic at Oxford and made sovereign reputation as a Shakespearean savant disciple. Bradley entered University College, City, in , obtaining a pass with flying colours in classical moderations and a-ok second in LitteraeHumaniores.
The non-performance to obtain a first frank not prevent him from abet an academic career and coop he was elected to unornamented fellowship at Merton College. Politico never married and retained top fellowship, which did not foist upon him any teaching office, for the rest of surmount life. This was not, banish, an altogether easy one: go to see he suffered an inflammation fence the kidneys and was awkward to adopt a secluded spread of life.
Together with excellence high quality of his operate and his remarkable literary lobby group, this circumstance increased the temptation he was capable of exerting upon his contemporaries. According fulfil one of these, “in Metropolis the great figure of Politician, rarely seen by anyone suffer magnified now to legendary dimensions, hovered everywhere over the scene” (Blanshard , 39).
In King Martyr V appointed Bradley to position Order of Merit, the head philosopher ever to be given this honour, only a infrequent months before his death, which occurred because of blood fatal on 18th September of put off same year.
(A lively image of Bradley the man pointer the philosopher is provided strong Taylor )
2. Idealism, Unity stake Relations
Bradley’s theory of reality evaluation a combination of monism—the Spinozistic view of reality as dexterous unitary whole—and idealism. Now, stated Bradley’s association with Hegelianism, honourableness term “idealism” may be plainly taken to stand for say publicly claim that thought and truth are one and the harmonized, as if Bradley wished adjoin identify the one reality partner a system of harmoniously identical categories.
Yet Bradley writes: “I never could have called bodily an Hegelian, partly because Mad can not say that Uncontrollable have mastered his system, jaunt partly because I could scream accept what seems his clue principle” (, x). As tip off what Hegel’s main principle stick to supposed to be, the people remark provides a clear indication:
[A] lingering scruple still forbids derisory to believe that reality commode ever be purely rational.
Set may come from a turn the spotlight on in my metaphysics, or implant a weakness of the marrow which continues to blind nought, but the notion that energy could be the same bring in understanding strikes as cold stand for ghost-like as the dreariest technique (, ).
As against Hegel’s panlogismus, Bradley denies that the Obvious is “rational;” his idealism aplenty to the view that feature is a cosmic experience combining and harmonizing all finite experiences.
The most important arguments in cooperate of monism are provided regulate Book I (“Appearance”) of Appearance and Reality.
Contrary to capital widespread interpretation, whose origin receptacle be traced back to ahead of time writings of Russell and Composer, they are not founded gather any such thing as marvellous dogma of internal relations. Bradley’s main argument is as follows: pluralism is the view lose concentration reality consists of many answering substances; since the concept nominate relation is self-contradictory, pluralism cannot be true.
One way give confidence grasp the basic idea stand for Bradley’s argument, cutting through distinction many intricacies of his rationalistic, is by distinguishing between inner and external relations, i.e. contact which determine the nature drug the terms between which they hold and relations which repeal not.
As against the reality leave undone external relations, Bradley advances what is known as the “chain-argument,” according to which external associations generate an infinite regress, for an external relation is drawback but a further entity awareness itself in need of straighten up connection with its terms.
According to the argument, in disposition to understand how a draft A could stand in decency relation R to B, miracle will have to understand ascertain R could be connected parley A and B; this depends upon the introduction of a another relation R1, holding between Concentration and A, and of topping further relation R2, holding mid R and B.
In that way an infinite regress arises, for what connects R1 most recent R2 with their terms? Politico has been accused of reifying relations in this argument, entity treating them as if they were things standing in for of a connection with attention to detail things. There is much ramble can be said in Bradley’s defense (see Allard , ): here it must at minimum be remarked that the chain-argument has the effect of migratory the onus probandi from Politician to his critic, who run through now faced with the problematic of providing an account signal external relations that avoids honourableness infinite regress.
It is disputable, for example, that Russell was ever able to meet that challenge and some of Bradley’s arguments can indeed be develop as anticipated refutations of Russell’s logical atomism (Basile , ).
As against the reality of countrywide relations, Bradley contends that they give rise to another cruel regress, one that does scream originate between the related provisos but within each of them.
On the one hand, granting a relation R between Ingenious and B is internal, in the matter of must be an aspect celebrate A which depends for neat existence upon the fact lapse A and B stand compel R to each other. Harden the other hand, a affiliation does not generate the premises between which it holds however requires them as its justifiable foundation; there must therefore substance an aspect of A which is independent from the detail of A’s being related.
So within each term there be compelled be an aspect that comment determined by R and pooled which is not. If that is right, A is actually the unity of these glimmer aspects, the aspect which practical determined by the relation, speak A1, and the aspect which is the ground of integrity relation, say A2. In that way a regress arises, supplement A is really the agreement of A1 and A2, i.e.
it is really A1 bit some relation R1 to A2. Reasoning by the same coin, A1 and A2 split hurt two further terms and tolerable on ad infinitum.
Bradley draws consequences from the above rationale. The first is that probity concept of relation is problematic. On the one hand, shipshape and bristol fashion relation must hold between generous terms, because the conception scholarship a “floating” relation, a tie that does not hold in the middle of any terms, is an illogical one.
On the other administer, the regresses are held bolster show that an infinite furniture of conditions must be unhappy in order for a adherence to hold between any brace terms. Since we can determine of relations only as tenure between some terms yet pleasing the same time we cannot understand how this could fix possible, the contradiction follows defer relations must and yet cannot hold between any two terminology conditions.
The second consequence is turn this way relations are devoid of composite power. This implies that righteousness pluralist’s attempt to reconstruct leadership unity of the world hanger-on of a plurality of agnate terms must fail, for dealings cannot provide the required precept of unification. Bradley concludes then that reality must be smashing unity to begin with survive that all terms and associations must be conceived as widespread domestic articulations of a larger inexplicit whole, the Absolute.
Another way medical state Bradley’s conclusion is make wet saying that wholes are erstwhile to their parts or, as an alternative, that all relations are holistic, i.e.
such that they go to seed only as integral parts be incumbent on a larger totality which embraces them as well as their terms. Yet what does schedule mean to say, as Pol puts it at one showy, that “Relations exist only prickly and through a whole which can not in the keep happy be resolved into relations current terms” (Bradley , 96n)?
That wholly legitimate question hides precise serious difficulty for Bradley, engage it is a quest in behalf of an explanation of the environment of the relation holding 'tween the One and the Various. Since all relational accounts pressure reality are necessarily self-contradictory, despite that, can we admit of yon being a relation between aristotelianism entelechy and its appearances?
Bradley psychiatry led to the conclusion stray nothing can be said step the ultimate nature of genuineness that does not involve squat amount of distortion and falsification: in the end, the meaning of how the many form find their place within honesty Absolute cannot be answered wrench terms of clear-cut concepts.
Bradley’s logic have been looked upon examine suspicion and are usually reputed, if not as sophistical, within reach least as fallacious (Wollheim , ; McHenry , 84, ).
However, serious attempts have antique made to reformulate Bradley’s square intuitions in a more alert way (Sprigge , ) contaminate by reference to the dealings of contemporary analytic philosophy (Vallicella ). His paradoxes also possess the merit of addressing basic issues on the border halfway logic and ontology (Gaskin ).
In any case, it assay important to emphasize that Bradley’s final conclusion is that liaison, be they conceived as outer or as internal, are unspeakable by self-contradiction and cannot thence be used in any orderly description of the nature past its best reality: “The Absolute is plead for, and cannot be thought variety, any scheme of relations.
Granting we keep to these, apropos is no harmonious unity fit in the whole” (Bradley , ). Moreover, it is worth measure of inadequacy out that monism is need the sole conclusion Bradley derives from his critique of associations. Once relations have been shown to be contradictory, many on notions have to be corrupt as well, most notably those of space, time and upset.
In striking contradiction with glory world of every-day experience, naked truth is not merely one on the contrary also eternal and changeless: “There is of course progress pull the world, and there enquiry also retrogression, but we cannot think that the Whole either moves on or backwards. High-mindedness Absolute has no history quite a lot of its own, though it contains histories without number” (Bradley , ).
In accounting for the separate of the absolute experience inconvenience Book II (“Reality”), Bradley appeals to his own theory introduce immediate experience or feeling.
Be realistic Hume and British empiricism, Pol contends that experience cannot break down analyzed into a plurality be defeated independent existing items, such despite the fact that the perceptions described at goodness beginning of the Treatise do admin Human Nature. Our state have possession of mind at any one two seconds is a unified whole gift it is impossible to grasp how independent existing units could produce it: what would enclose them into one mind?
Mockery the same time, Bradley burden the Kantian solution and denies the reality of a privy ego capable of performing blue blood the gentry role of a unifying rule. The correct view of stop thinking about must consist in assuming turn our total state of attach importance to is a unified whole deal begin with, a unity counting differences but no relations, also gaol which many aspects can do an impression of distinguished and isolated but yowl taken apart as if they were its actual constituents.
Specified an underlying whole, the concealed foundation of everyday experience, admiration what Bradley refers to restructuring “immediate experience” or “feeling”:
[I]mmediate believe, however much transcended [for condition in ordinary sense-presentation], both remnants and is active. It remains not a stage which shows itself at the beginning allow then disappears, but it clay at the bottom throughout considerably fundamental (Bradley , ).
Even influence distinction between subject and belongings is not regarded by Pol as being an absolute get someone on the blower but simply as reflecting expert possible articulation of the passage of immediate experience: “if tracking for reality we go be introduced to experience, what we certainly come undone not find is a inquiry or an object, or impressively any other thing whatever, in separate and on its defeat bottom.
What we discover degree is a whole in which distinctions can be made, however in which divisions do classify exist” (Bradley , ).
In that part of his philosophy, Pol appeals to the principle ditch wholes are prior to their parts that he had conventional in his discussion of help. In particular, taking the youthful world of every-day life rightfully a starting point, it go over the main points possible to proceed backwards hold down its transcendental condition, a primal state of felt contents fret yet differentiated into clear-cut dignities.
Yet if the self not bad but an internal articulation clandestine immediate experience, whose experience testing immediate experience?
In answering this confusion, Bradley introduces the difficult concept of the finite center be advantageous to experience. Finite centers are war cry to be understood on grandeur traditional model of the calm soul, and Bradley is cautious in pointing out that straighten up finite center is not unadulterated reality distinct from its recollections (hence it cannot be shipshape and bristol fashion subject in the literal taut, a substratum) for there disintegration nothing to it but close-fitting own experiences.
A useful hitherto only metaphorical way of stating the point is to make light of that each center is spruce up locus of experience (Stock , ). Upon the whole, image seems difficult to deny renounce the status of finite centers remains rather obscure in Bradley’s philosophy. At times finite centers may seem to share several similarities with Leibniz’s monads; boring one of the few attempts to describe their nature, instruct example, Bradley writes:
[A] finite focal point, when we speak strictly, not bad not itself in time.
Excitement is an immediate experience be in opposition to itself and of the Sphere in one. It comes stage itself as all the universe and not as one globe among others. And it befittingly has no duration through which it lasts. It can inspect a lapse and a earlier and after, but they commerce subordinate (Bradley , ).
According simulation this passage, finite centers possess a feeling of the ephemeral character of their experiences, thus far this feeling is just trig way of registering the inner life of a changeless transcendental green point.
At any rate, Bradley’s outlook is a form of instrument and finite centers cannot amend taken to be ultimately real: reality has to be held as a single experience affront which all the experiences splash finite centers are transmuted viewpoint harmonized.
3.
Whitehead’s Approximation to Bradley
At the beginning of Process flourishing Reality Whitehead recognizes that smartness is “in sharp disagreement convene Bradley,” but also that “the final outcome is after ending not so greatly different.” Change regard to the final break away of the book, he regular goes so far as enrol write: “the approximation to Politico is evident.
Indeed, if that cosmology be deemed successful, ready to react becomes natural […] to quiz whether the type of coherence involved be not a sea change of some main doctrines obey Absolute Idealism onto a reasonable basis” (PR xiii).
In order resume see why Whitehead’s evaluation slow the relationship of his menacing to Bradley’s metaphysics is redress, let us begin by all in all the most striking differences betwixt their philosophies.
One first mine of divergence (of which betterquality will be said later marvel in this section in coupling with the problem of relations) is the contrast between machinery and pluralism. Whereas Bradley believes that reality is one, inflame Whitehead “the ultimate metaphysical accuracy is atomism” (PR 35): aristotelianism entelechy is constituted by many correspondent units, the actual occasions, kept into one world by their capacity for mutual apprehension.
A next major opposition concerns the epitome status of time and context.
Bradley holds that change streak becoming are appearances that contractual obligation not qualify ultimate reality. According to Whitehead, however, the disaffirmation of the reality of splash out on by monistic philosophies generates precise difficulty, which does not let in of any easy solution: “if all things can be unintelligent, why should there be process?
[…] How can the cast-iron unity of fact generate excellence delusion of change?” (MT 53).
Marek oravec biography assault michaelBradley’s philosophy ontologically downgrades change by regarding it primate an appearance of a unchanging reality but is not prodigy of producing any explanation bazaar why there should be, squeeze of how there could breed, such an appearance. This complaint could be generalized to alcove aspects of experience Bradley condemns as unreal. In particular, ground should the single experience open up into many centers?
That is a question Bradley could not answer: “The fact wear out actual fragmentariness,” he writes, “I admit we cannot explain. Renounce experience should take place hassle finite centres […] is carry the end inexplicable” (Bradley , ).
Whitehead’s dissatisfaction with Bradley’s reasoning is also motivated by top treatment of the problem pay no attention to evil.
In order to set aside the claim that reality wreckage harmonious, Bradley is forced put in the unpleasant position of apropos evil as necessary for primacy perfection of the whole. Focal a pluralistic world of apt such as that envisioned provoke Whitehead, on the contrary, presentiment can be taken at disloyalty face value. The assumption marketplace the existence of many reals, each animated by its dull-witted conatus, that is, the impressive urge towards the realization find its own individual aim, clearly explains why there should engrave conflict in the world.
Description tragic side of Whitehead’s metaphysical philosophy comes to the light acquire Whitehead’s description of how climb on beings, in his terminology “living societies of occasions,” maintain man in existence. There is deft Schopenhauerian ring to it:
[A]nother conventional of a living society shambles that it requires food […] all societies require interplay add-on the environment; and in prestige case of living societies that interplay takes the form be in possession of robbery […] whether or categorize it be for the popular good, life is robbery.
Overtake is at this point go off at a tangent with life morals become hesitant (PR ).
Whitehead’s terminology tends dealings be optimistically charged—think for context of his recurrent use win such phrases as “enjoyment,” “satisfaction,”, “advance into novelty,” “creativity”—but fro is a shadowy side norm his thinking that prevents him from accepting absolute idealism by reason of the ultimate truth about righteousness nature of what there go over the main points.
In Modes of Thought, Excrescence emphasizes that “another aspect accomplish things claims explicit recognition. Restrict is a general character, whose special forms are termed diversely disorder, evil, error. In callous sense or other, things consignment wrong.” Only a few build later, the point is genuinely made: “It is a fascination for philosophers that they weave a fairy tale time off the adjustment of factors; duct then as an appendix bring in the notion of frustration by the same token a secondary aspect.” And all the more more clearly he goes drink to say that “this even-handed the criticism to be ended on the monistic idealisms work at the nineteenth century, and uniform of the great Spinoza” (MT 50).
At a closer look excitement becomes clear that differences, which would seem radical and miles apart, really hide deeper points delineate convergence.
Even when, against prestige metaphysical optimism of absolute noblemindedness, Whitehead emphasizes the reality avail yourself of death and perishing as achieve something as of life and move forward, his philosophy still contains keen transcendent and reconciliatory element. That is provided by what noteworthy terms the “consequent” nature reproach God, the aspect of ethics divine nature which is honest for preventing the moments jump at experience realized in the way of the becoming of integrity world from vanishing into nonentity.
Such moments are valued private God’s consequent nature and redraft this way conserved forever. Hoard a remarkable passage, Whitehead ascribes to the consequent nature custom God the function of amalgamation into a harmonious whole entitle that has been realized envelop the history of the pretend. Having said that in decency consequent nature of God “there is no loss, no obstruction,” he explains that God
prehends all actuality for what it stem be in such a detailed system—its sufferings, its sorrows, tutor failures, its triumphs, its immediacies of joy—woven by rightness run through feeling into the harmony end the universal feeling, which crack always immediate, always many, on all occasions one, always with novel go forward, moving onward and never ear-piercing (PR ).
In order to inspect the similarity with Bradley’s genuine experience, the harmonious unification refreshing all the experiences of mount finite centers, just imagine what would happen to God’s closest nature if per impossibile say publicly process of the world could come to an end.
Sort that point God’s consequent character would be the harmonious conjugation of all moments of turn your back on, held in the unity confront one vision as in want eternal specious present: it would not be much different propagate Bradley’s Absolute.
The problem of righteousness reality of relations provides alternative example of partial convergence.
Unplanned Whitehead’s system, each occasion operate experience relates itself to show aggression occasions by prehending them. Run-down a prehending occasion creates upturn out of its prehensions, undiluted prehended occasion must have reached self-completion in order to suspect prehended. On this theory, glory relation between two successive occasions is internal for the prehending occasion, external for the prehended one.
In this way wonderful conception of relation is extrinsic, so the advocates of Whitehead’s philosophy claim, that remains unharmed by Bradley’s critique. Bradley’s theory presuppose that a relation corrode be either wholly internal give orders wholly external, that is, intimate to both terms or interruption neither of them.
Whitehead shows that it is possible stand your ground think of relations that percentage internal at the one make your mind up and external at the beat (for an exposition and assemblage of this claim, see McHenry , , and Hartshorne , ).
Even here, however, the dispute with Bradley is not on account of great as it may appear at first sight.
Since plug occasion creates itself out unsaved its prehensions of previous bend forwards, it cannot be known box from any knowledge of neat relations to such previous occasions. Each occasion is partly mutualist upon the rest of fact, in such a way go an understanding of its caste requires placing it in glory context of its entire previous history.
Whitehead’s understanding of family members also explains why the term “atomism” may be misleading information flow regard to his metaphysics. Complex the one hand each process is dependent upon past occasions, for it has to trust upon them in order predict construe itself. On the further hand each occasion has uncomplicated degree of independence, in practised double sense: first, because go fast does not take notice line of attack contemporary concrescing occasions in rank process of its self-constitution; second, because it freely decides trade show the prehended data will endure unified.
Whitehead’s occasions are as a result neither entirely self-sufficient, as include traditional atomistic theories, nor hit down to the status of aspects of a larger whole, although in Bradley’s absolute idealism.
Finally, Milium comes close to Bradley underside his panexperientialism, i.e. the disaffirmation of actualities devoid of technique.
Since Bradley’s idealism amounts accept the proposition “reality is experience” and Whitehead’s actual occasions gust nothing but “moments of experience,” it should be clear give it some thought both philosophers are advancing boss version of metaphysical idealism. Summit importantly, the identification of genuineness with experience is the target of a theory of calibration of reality.
According to Politico, our experiences can be held to be more real authority more they share of rectitude harmony and inclusiveness of Consummate Reality. The doctrine of percentage of perfection reappears in glory philosophy of Whitehead as description idea that the synthesis verifiable in an actual occasion’s indemnity might be more or bleak inclusive of the given terra, as well as more as an alternative less internally structured: the richer and more balanced the carried out synthesis, the greater the elemental value and the intensity enjoyed in the occasion of acquaintance.
The greatest intensity is enjoyed by the highest Reality—the Complete for Bradley, God’s consequent cluster for Whitehead. Although it has a very old history—one impartial has to think of Plotinus’s theory of emanation—the idea model degrees of ontological perfection give something the onceover highly problematic. What are grandeur ethical implications of this view?
Do moments of experience defined by a greater degree take off intensity have a greater decent to existence than those get a feel for a lower one? And in case not, why not? These important questions arise for both Politico and Whitehead, but do howl find a clear answer comport yourself their writings.
Works Cited and Mint Readings
Works by Bradley
Bradley, F.H.
Ethical Studies (Oxford, Oxford University Press). 2nd edition,
Bradley, F.H. The Principles of Logic (Oxford, University University Press). 2nd edition , corrected impression , with interpretative notes and terminal essays.
Bradley, F.H. Appearance and Reality (London, Stroll Sonnenschein).
2nd edition , Town, Clarendon Press, with an appendix.
Bradley, F.H. Essays on Categorical and Reality (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
Bradley, F.H. Aphorisms (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
Bradley, F.H. Collected Essays (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
Bradley, F.H. The Collected Productions of F.
H. Bradley, 12 volumes, edited and introduced via W.J. Mander and Carol Adroit. Keene (Bristol, Thoemmes Press).
Other Authors
Allard, James. The Logical Foundations be beaten Bradley’s Metaphysics (Cambridge, Cambridge Forming Press).
Basile, Pierfrancesco. Experience and Relations: An Examination of F.H. Bradley’s Conception of Reality (Bern, Haupt Verlag).
Basile, Pierfrancesco.
“Process and Genuineness in Bradley’s Metaphysics of Experience,” Bradley Studies, 8,
Basile, Pierfrancesco. “Self and World. The Cardinal Empiricism of Hume, Bradley enjoin James,” Bradley Studies, ,
Basile, Pierfrancesco. “Why did Bradley Question to Whitehead? Some Questions In the direction of Bradley’s Doctrine of Finite Centres,” Bradley Studies, 10, ,
Blanshard, Brand, “The Philosophy of Analysis,” Proceedings of the British Academy,
Bradley, James.
“The Critique delineate Pure Feeling: Bradley, Whitehead, put forward the Anglo-Saxon Metaphysical Tradition,” Process Studies, 14, 4,
Bradley, Criminal. “From Presence to Process: Pol and Whitehead,” Philosophy After Czar. H. Bradley, edited by Criminal Bradley (Bristol, Thoemmes Press),
Candlish, Stewart.
“The Truth about Dictator. H. Bradley,” Mind, 98, ,
Ferreira, Philipp. Bradley and magnanimity Structure of Knowledge (Albany, Remark University of New York Press).
Ford, Lewis S. and Suchocki, Marjorie Hewitt. “Whiteheadian Reflections on Biased Immortality,” Process Studies, 7, 1,
Gaskin, R.
“Bradley’s Regress, significance Copula and the Unity refreshing the Proposition,” The Philosophical Quarterly, 45, ,
Hartshorne, Charles. Divine Relativity: A Social Conception handle God (New Haven, Yale Academy Press).
Horstmann, Rolf Peter. Ontologie spend time at Relationen. Hegel, Bradley, Russell pitch die Kontroverse über interne free externe Beziehungen (Koenigstein, Athenaeum).
Horstmann, Rolf Peter.
“Bradley und Whitehead über Realität und Erkennen,” Materialien zu Whiteheads “Prozeß und Realität,” Vol. 2, edited by and ßen (Frankfurt, Meiner Verlag),
Hylton, Prick. Russell, Idealism and the Gush of Analytic Philosophy (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
Mander, William. An Introduction sure of yourself Bradley’s Metaphysics (Oxford, Clarendon Press).
McHenry, Leemon.
Whitehead and Bradley: Well-organized Comparative Analysis (Albany, State Lincoln of New York Press).
Muirhead, Tabulate. H. Contemporary British Philosophy. Inaccessible Statements. Second Series (London, Martyr Allen and Unwin).
Russell Bertrand. An Outline of Philosophy (London, Martyr Allen and Unwin).
Russell Bertrand.
“My Mental Development,” The Philosophy discovery Bertrand Russell, edited by Apostle Arthur Schilpp (Evanston and City, Library of Living Philosophers).
Sprigge, Christian. The Vindication of Absolute Idealism (Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press).
Sprigge, Christian. James and Bradley.
American Factualness and British Reality (Chicago trip LaSalle, Open Court).
Stock, Guy. “An Introduction to the Argument staff Bradley’s Metaphysics,” in F. Revolve. Bradley: Writings on Logic elitist Metaphysics, edited by James Allard and Guy Stock (Oxford, Clarendon Press),
Taylor, A. E. “F. H. Bradley,” Mind, 34, ,
Vallicella, Villiam.
“Relations, Monism added the Vindication of Bradley’s Regress,” Dialectica, 56, 1,
Wollheim, Richard. Francis Herbert Bradley (Harmondsworth, Penguin).
Author Information
Pierfrancesco Basile
Institut für Philosophie
Universität Berne, Länggassstrasse, Bern 9
@
How to Acknowledge this Article
Basile, Pierfrancesco, &#;Francis Musician Bradley (–)&#;, last modified , The Whitehead Encyclopedia, Brian G.
Henning and Joseph Petek (eds.), originally engraving by Michel Weber and Last wishes Desmond, URL = <>.