Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

INTRODUCTION: SETTING LIMITS

INTRODUCTION: SETTING LIMITS INTRODUCTION: SETTING LIMITS “Take it back,” Stephen Toulmin urged intellectuals, on behalf of the editorial board, as Common Knowledge began its first series in 1992. Calling for papers in which theorists would signal the nth degree of skepticism by retracting the arguments that had made their reputations, Toulmin himself took back (“I regard my book Reason in Ethics . . . as the work of another person”) his own earliest thinking. In the years since Toulmin’s call appeared, CK has amassed a cache of promissory notes from influential theorists, largely in the humanities; but only one, a social scientist (Albert Hirschman), has delivered. Possibly the time has come to collect on all these markers. Probably the time is right for the journal itself to set a good example. But how to take back taking back? Common Knowledge, to coin a field, is a journal of gray studies. A black-andwhite day, September 11, 2001, has brought the editors to rethink our fidelity to rethinking. Stanley Fish was not alone, after September 11, in being asked if terrorist violence “meant the end of postmodern relativism.” In the New York Common Knowledge 8:2 Copyright 2002 by Duke University Press Times, Fish http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Common Knowledge Duke University Press

INTRODUCTION: SETTING LIMITS

Common Knowledge , Volume 8 (2) – Apr 1, 2002

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/introduction-setting-limits-l3xrvxgVZR
Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2002 by Duke University Press
ISSN
0961-754X
eISSN
1538-4578
DOI
10.1215/0961754X-8-2-284
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: SETTING LIMITS “Take it back,” Stephen Toulmin urged intellectuals, on behalf of the editorial board, as Common Knowledge began its first series in 1992. Calling for papers in which theorists would signal the nth degree of skepticism by retracting the arguments that had made their reputations, Toulmin himself took back (“I regard my book Reason in Ethics . . . as the work of another person”) his own earliest thinking. In the years since Toulmin’s call appeared, CK has amassed a cache of promissory notes from influential theorists, largely in the humanities; but only one, a social scientist (Albert Hirschman), has delivered. Possibly the time has come to collect on all these markers. Probably the time is right for the journal itself to set a good example. But how to take back taking back? Common Knowledge, to coin a field, is a journal of gray studies. A black-andwhite day, September 11, 2001, has brought the editors to rethink our fidelity to rethinking. Stanley Fish was not alone, after September 11, in being asked if terrorist violence “meant the end of postmodern relativism.” In the New York Common Knowledge 8:2 Copyright 2002 by Duke University Press Times, Fish

Journal

Common KnowledgeDuke University Press

Published: Apr 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.