Reason in Action. A Response to McDowell on Hegel

  • Robert PippinEmail author
Part of the Studies in German Idealism book series (SIGI, volume 20)


John McDowell has criticized readings of Hegel that would have him holding that freedom should be understood as the achievement of some mutual recognitive status. He thinks that this saddles Hegel with an “unconvincing” argument, and one that is “out of tune with the characteristic shape of Hegel’s thinking.” Second, he criticizes an interpretation of the “inner-outer” relation in acting, one that tries to account for Hegel’s claim for the speculative “identity” of inner and outer in action. McDowell thinks that the criticized interpretation involves, again, a “misreading”, one that has Hegel “mishandle” the topic in general. And again, an alternate interpretation is presented and defended; defended both as a better reading of the text and sounder philosophically. In both cases the interpretations are mine, and I respond to them in this essay as both correct interpretations and as philosophically sound.


Pure Practical Reason McDowell Claims Sittlichkeit Linguistic Embodiment Conceptual Capacities 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alznauer, Mark. 2015. Hegel’s Theory of Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Kant, Immanuel. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Ed. and Trans. P. Guyer and A.W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Pippin, Robert. 2000a. Hegel’s Practical Philosophy: The Realization of Freedom. In The Cambridge Companion to German Idealism, ed. Karl Ameriks, 180–199. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ———. 2000b. What is the Question for which Hegel’s Theory of Recognition is the Answer? European Journal of Philosophy 8 (2): 155–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ———. 2004. Hegels praktischer Realismus: rationales Handeln als Sittlichkeit. In Hegels Erbe, ed. Ch. Halbig, M. Quante, and L. Siep, 295–323. Frankfurt a. M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 2006b. Recognition and Reconciliation: Actualized Agency in Hegel’s Jena Phenomenology. In Hegel: New Directions, ed. Katerina Deligiorgi. Chesham: Acumen.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2007. McDowell’s Germans: Response to ‘On Pippin’s Postscript’. European Journal of Philosophy 15 (3): 411–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. ———. 2008. Hegel’s Practical Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations