Concordance to Concepts and Categories

compiled by Nick Hall

All impressions published before 2013 use the typesetting, and therefore the pagination, of the first edition (1978). The exception to this is the Pimlico 1999 edition, which places an updated editor’s preface before the author’s preface, in contrast to the previous impressions. This has been recorded here - otherwise the text concords with the 1979 edition. The second edition (2013) has been completely reset. This concordance facilitates the conversion of page references to one edition into references to the other. The text of the second edition, which has been revised throughout, and added to, should be used in all new and revised translations.

1978 First Line (1978) 1999 US 2013
vii Some of these articles were written xi xxv
viii natural sciences or mathematics; the other xii xxvi
ix This is the second vii
x Goal’ in Leonard Russell (ed.), viii
xi Isaiah Berlin is most widely known for xiii xxix
xii papers can, and surely do, preserve the xiv xxx
xiii This unacceptably idealist equivalence, xv xxxi
xiv correct account of the constitution of xvi xxxii
xv no general theoretical critique xvii xxxiii
xvi right?’). What above all concerns xviii xxxv
xvii the interests of general utility or xix xxxvi
xviii in the name of honesty, or truthfulness xx xxxvii
1 What is the subject-matter of philosophy? 1
2 logic, or grammar, or chess, or heraldry 2
3 mirror, which it would find to consist 3
4 possessing unquestionable authority or 4
5 of astronomy created, leaving behind 6
6 that had achieved so magnificent a 7
7 clarification and establish the human 8
8 they followed the commandments that 9
9 different sets of spectacles, using 11
10 at present – all these are models in 12
11 desires and needs of others – it 14
12 This paper is an attempt to estimate 15
13 [state]ment any sentence which 16
14 was too vague and excluded too little 18
15 expresses a proposition, without 19
16 a sentence for example as ‘It was 20
17 unless one can say that there could be 22
18 and categorical, but not to be conclusively 23
19 altogether. Ayer, conscious this perhaps 25
20 By far the most ingenious attempt to 26
21 absurdities resulted. I verify the 27
22 assert, for example, that if I look up I 29
23 omnisentient being which is in all 30
24 right a proposition which in suitable 31
25 conclusively. In all possible cases 33
26 3 This brings us to the third type 33
27 necessarily elude observation; when for 35
28 explained by the fact that m is vague 36
29 be no more absurd to say that he 37
30 phenomenalism which this entails it 38
31 similar to significant ones. Such a 39
32 It is becoming fashion amongst 40
33 language of science could, with no 41
34 positions involves the possibility 42
35 objects had been unjustifiably 43
36 object as definable in terms of it. 44
37 above – has not been kept 46
38 the theorem asserts is considered 47
39 America, then I agree – and 48
40 to which can be discovered by ordinary 49
41 an intermittent series of actual data 51
42 modern European languages – which 52
43 referring directly or indirectly to 53
44 in meaning any sentence not asserting 54
45 Johnson’s well known attitude does 55
46 causal. I cannot point to the table 57
47 in particular of proper names – 58
48 of indication of how sentences mean’ 60
49 categorical propositions, by contrast 61
50 etc. may be true and yet nothing exist 62
51 (dispositional) about the one next door 64
52 not directly verifiable, and consequently 65
53 light or heavy? Surely the sense datum 66
54 necessary or sufficient conditions of the 67
55 most prevalant modern form of it 68
56 There is a cluster of problems which have 70
57 amount of ingenuity has been used 71
58 is then assumed to be one of simple 72
59 mathematical physics foremost; Locke 74
60 perhaps, the ‘meanings’ of some categorical 75
61 requiring a minimum of certain definite 76
62 Leaving aside for the moment what would 77
63 propositions as hypothetical or general 79
64 themselves directly controvertible into 80
65 far as the blood royal of the genuine 81
66 moreover of accommodating games, Utopias, 82
67 of singular propositions were general ones 84
68 these, as soon as invoked, harden into terms 85
69 be of the same logical type, for there 86
70 be without interest to consider the nature 87
71 the information we mean them to convey? 89
72 characteristics to our data by means of the 90
73 of singular statements does it belong?’ 91
74 to discredit. But the method is obviously being 92
75 ever, the notion that because there were 94
76 every species of proposition as combinations 95
77 names of such ultimate constituents, molecular 96
78 need never slip; by contracting our claims 97
79 merely discomfiting but in some way 99
80 they may wish to communicate; and for this 101
81 ‘Every man to count for one and no one 102
82 standards of justice, divinely sanctioned 103
83 the principle in this way leaves open crucial 104
84 A society in which every member holds an equal 106
85 promote equality of behaviour or treatment 107
86 system, which consists entirely of rules, and is 108
87 egalitarianism seems to entail that any rule 110
88 rule that it is bad or iniquitous need not 111
89 expression, where both the use and recognition 112
90 derive much force from an intimate connection 114
91 sources of unequal rights, or furnish good 115
92 conductorless orchestra is not feasible, then 116
93 an end in itself, but as the end, 118
94 birth, or colour, which human beings cannot 119
95 criterion of equality has plainly been 120
96 the propositions which describe what should 121
97 demand for fairness. The notions of equality 123
98 to balance the claims of, ends or values 124
99 natural social hierarchy, like Burke 125
100 and would regard it as ‘fairer’ if some 127
101 treat all men alike in like situations 128
102 one that did. In its extreme form egalitarianism 129
103 History, according to Aristotle, is an 130
104 from them; there were those who defiantly 131
105 School has emphasised since the days of Bossuet 132
106 all social problems by means of a scientific 133
107 by the magnificent progress of the natural 135
108 and experiences. Metaphorical and misleading 136
109 which are entailed by our whole thinking 137
110 to conceive the history of an institution as an 138
111 – more dependable – avenue to factual 140
112 is, by the rules of our ordinary logic, 141
113 prisoners of their theories; they are accused 142
114 of even the most rudimentary science; and 143
115 itself not open to inductive or deductive 144
116 range or dependability (or specifiability) 146
117 be capable of being estimated with a fair 147
118 could his answer be? He might hesitantly 148
119 are in this way recorded. In the case of 150
120 the unknown. It follows from this that 151
121 consideration of economists of psychological 152
122 and economic facts and events. But I am able 153
123 What was there in France in the eighteenth 154
124 an interrelated social whole, obtained from 156
125 due to rational or purposive, and what to 157
126 grappled with the problem: Leibniz and Hegel 158
127 resent the arrogant and strong’, or 159
128 accept them, the answer must surely be that 161
129 based on an inductively reached conclusion 162
130 my situation vis-à-vis other conscious 164
131 heap them into one, and reel off a 165
132 have so notably done), but the function 166
133 merely as organisms in space, the regularities 167
134 be sustained, it must be, as the generalisations 169
135 course, it is a priori (as Vico 170
136 that cannot but be his own, is a task that 171
137 archaeologist, but not those of an historian 172
138 alone gives its sense to the very notion of 174
139 arise. But the descriptive and explanatory 175
140 beings, as we understand the term, could have 176
141 with a logic of its own. It is the ‘logic’ 177
142 of particular events, persons, predicaments 179
143 Is there still such a subject as political theory? 180
144 This type of systematic parricide is, in effect 181
145 criminal law functions or why Mr Kennedy 183
146 evidence for an answer and what would not 184
147 sociology, too large to be considered 185
148 to an intellectual pursuit is clearly not 186
149 created and old ones destroyed – expressions 187
150 priorities and ultimate ends, is possible, is 189
151 but elements in it or expressions of it 190
152 questions presupposes a pluralism of values 191
153 It is at this point that the deep division 192
154 Here too stand those twentieth-century 194
155 that a man has, and on the place that 195
156 creation of a demiurge, in which freedom 196
157 model. Those who are obsessed by one model 198
158 To suppose, then, that there have been or 199
159 social contract is a model which to this day 200
160 – experienced events, ‘inner’ or ‘outer’ 201
161 based on empirical data and the methods of 203
162 theology, or perhaps in some other discipline 204
163 order and interpret data. To analyse 205
164 in thinking of human beings as human, and 206
165 analysis of which Kant transformed philosophy 207
166 words available to us as we are today 208
167 Extreme cases of this sort are of philosophical 210
168 and bold and fruitful hypothesis will explain 211
169 incoherent solutions of the past without 212
170 ‘scientism’ in political ethics. Some of 213
171 speculation. But this merely takes the argument 215
172 of our beliefs. We may be conditions to 216
173 Does knowledge always liberate? 217
174 where the frontier dividing the external world 218
175 [com]pulsive behaviour. True liberty 220
176 know that I am liable to epileptic fits, or 221
177 avoid this burden, there is a tendency 222
178 to my sweet will, in accordance with principles 223
179 compulsion is itself the result of an earlier 225
180 perhaps necessarily so – this Baconian 226
181 to resist them, they were as stocks and stones 227
182 oneself whether it makes sense to ask 228
183 that his capacity for freedom of choice is 230
184 irrational and obsolete; it will expose such 231
185 acceptable alternatives can ever present itself 232
186 x can predict the total behaviour of y 233
187 cannot in principle be predictive. That, if I 235
188 In other words, I see no reason to suppose 236
189 of one’s own and others’ conduct, would 237
190 describe a man as being free if his conduct 238
191 inspected and rationally examined – these 239
192 Even if no hard and fast rule can be provided 241
193 It is worth noting that it is the actual doors 242
194 their rhetorical force from the fact that there 243
195 self-determination; for I can now give a 195
196 successfully. If David had known more 196
197 as we now think the burning of widows or eating 247
198 not of knowing that, but of knowing what to do 248