Strawson's Motivations

It's difficult to consider motivations of philosophers.

They go public and they go private.

Consider Strawson's on-record reason why he sent Grice's "Meaning" for publication.

(Words):

"He was a genius. He was perhaps
slightly weak on the publishing
front. But so are Gettier and
Albritton, and so I'm not."

---

Privately:

Bennett. In a paper by Bennett I quoted in my first PUB-lication ever, "Grice on Grice on Grice", elsewhere, he writes:

"Grice's thing was a common sense cliche"

-- or words. He then goes on to propose a link between:

1956 -- this year of grice

and

1957 -- this year of grice.

Bennett, who should know better and does know better NOW -- writes:

"Surely, the fact that Grice wrote "Meaning" in 1957 is a strict causal consequence of his having written with Strawson "In defense of a dogma" a year earlier"

For Bennett goes on to dis-historice:

"Grice there proposes a reason why
his essay with Strawson made sense.
Grice and Strawson conclude that paper
with a defense of 'analytic' in terms
of 'mean', and the serious student
will now want a study of 'mean' in terms
_other_ than 'analytic' to break
the circle found vicious by Quine."

But lovely as the legend goes, the history goes elsewhere:

Grice 'published' "Meaning" back in the day, in 1948, as a lovely occasion to discuss with his mates at the Oxford Philosophical Society -- the fact that Bennett is otherwise Oxonian is a slight pain here -- stuff he was elaborating vis a vis his notes on Peirce and Stevenson as he lectured on the evenings for his tutees, and Lit. Hum. students.

The "In defense of a dogma" thing was rather Grice/Strawson's having invited the man (Quine) for a term or two -- Quine stayed at St. John's -- and feeling they needed to pay a little tribute to 'the man'.

While Grice may have been diffident (in T. W.'s appraisal -- I protest!) he was allways ready for a good philosophical fight!

--- Jones regrets that much of philosophy is 'gladiatory' in nature. The later later later later Grice agreed: "Let's have some PEACE" he said, 'eirenic' he said, which is Greek for peace. He finds that Aristotle after all speaks of diagoge as opposed to 'epagoge' and he finds the former will 'ameliorate' the current gladiatory scenery where indeed, to echo Lakoff -- in "Metaphors we can live without" -- calls ARGUMENT is WAR.

Etc.

So, imagine the scenario:

"Grice?" "Who's that?" On seeing that Grice had co-published with Strawson a piece in the Philosophical Review ("In defense of a dogma", 1957).

"Why, he is my tutor in Oxford. Published author, too"

"Published -- what?"

"'Personal Identity', back in the day" (1941, Mind).

"Surely that's pretty perishable?" (pun on 'publish or perish').

Mmmm. Next thing Sir Peter asks Lady Ann (nee Martin) as she then wasn't, and she types Grice's "Meaning" for, er, posterity.

And Strawson got to have a co-author which eventually will be more renowned that his-self!

Etc. But don't get me wrong. It's just that I feel to rob Peter to pay ...