Skip to main content

Conclusion: Reading Collingwood

Performing as an Interpreter

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Performing Political Theory
  • 278 Accesses

Abstract

The sixth and final lesson comes from recent academic studies of textual interpretation. R. G. Collingwood makes the first step in his generally ignored 1933 work on philosophical method. Leo Strauss takes the second step with his punishing critique of Collingwood’s theories of interpretation. The third step is taken by Claude Lefort whose theories of writing and reading rehabilitate Strauss as the philosopher-interpreter necessary for those wanting to understand the history of modern political theory.

The original version of this chapter was revised: Belated author correction has been corrected. The erratum to this chapter is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7998-6_8

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Boucher, David, and Andrew Vincent. 2000. British Idealism and Political Theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood, R.G. 1944. An Autobiography. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Pelican Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood, R.G. 1989. Essays in Political Philosophy, ed. David Boucher. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood, R.G. 1993. The Idea of History, Revised ed., edited with an Introduction by Jan Van Der Dussen. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collingwood, R.G. 2008. An Essay on Philosophical Method, ed. James Connelly and Giuseppina D’Oro. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connelly, James, and Giuseppina D’Oro. 2008. Editors’ Introduction. In An Essay on Philosophical Method, ed. R.G. Collingwood, xiii–cxii. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducasse, C.J. 1936. Mr. Collinwood on Philosophical Method. The Journal of Philosophy 33 (4): 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 1979. Truth and Method, 2nd ed. trans. William Glen-Doepel. London: Sheed and Ward.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henze, Donald. 1980. The Style of Philosophy. The Monist 63 (4): 417–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefort, Claude. 2000. Writing: The Political Test, trans. and ed. David Ames Curtis. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, Arthur E. 1935. Review. The Philosophical Review 44 (2): 191–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pangle, Thomas. 2006. Leo Strauss: An Introduction to His Thought and Intellectual Legacy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russel, L.J. 1934. Review. Philosophy 9 (35): 350–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiller, F.C.S. 1934. New Books. Mind 43 (169): 118–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, Leo. 1952. On Collingwood’s Philosophy of History. Review of Metaphysics 5 (4): 559–586.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, Leo. 1989. The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism. Selected and Introduced by Thomas Pangle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Uhr .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Uhr, J. (2018). Conclusion: Reading Collingwood. In: Performing Political Theory . Palgrave Pivot, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-7998-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics