Element contents
Hegel and the Pittsburgh School
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 August 2026
Summary
In recent years, John McDowell and Robert Brandom have developed influential interpretations of Hegel's thought. It is often assumed that their work is complementary, which is why they are said to be members of the same philosophical school, the Pittsburgh School. In this book, I ask the question of whether they actually are part of the same school by examining their readings of the Phenomenology of Spirit. On the one hand, their readings of the text significantly diverge. While McDowell reads the Phenomenology in a therapeutic spirit, Brandom reads it as constructing a complex pragmatic-semantic theory. But, on the other hand, they both read the text as providing us with an account of thought and experience that, while avoiding the Myth of the Given, is nonetheless able to vindicate its objectivity. For this reason, I argue that McDowell and Brandom belong to the same philosophical school.
Information
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009559546Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 01 May 2028
References
Abath, A. and Sanguinetti, F., eds. (2018). McDowell and Hegel. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Allison, H. (1997). We Can Act Only under the Idea of Freedom. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 71 (2), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, G. (1996). McDowell’s Kant: “Mind and World.” Philosophy, 71 (276), 219–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouché, G. ed. (2020). Reading Brandom: On A Spirit of Trust. London: Routledge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, M. (2012). Essentially Rational Animals. In Abel, G. and Conant, J., eds., Rethinking Epistemology. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 395–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, M. (2016). Additive Theories of Rationality: A Critique. European Journal of Philosophy, 24 (3), 527–555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (1996). Perception and Rational Constraint: McDowell’s Mind and World, Philosophical Issues, 7, 241–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (2002). Tales of the Mighty Dead: Historical Essays in the Metaphysics of Intentionality. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, R. (2008). Between Saying and Doing: Toward an Analytical Pragmatism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (2009). Reason in Philosophy: Animating Ideas. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (2011). Perspectives on Pragmatism: Classical, Recent, and Contemporary. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, R. (2015). From Empiricism to Expressivism: Brandom Reads Sellars. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandom, R. (2019). A Spirit of Trust: A Reading of Hegel’s Phenomenology. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Brandom, R. (2022). Replies to Honneth, McDowell, Pippin, and Stern. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 103 (3), 741–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, J. (2020). Is Brandom a Positivist? Notes on Alienation, Trust, Confession, and Forgiveness. In Bouché, G., ed., Reading Brandom: on A Spirit of Trust. London: Routledge Press, pp. 123–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bristow, B. (2005). Bildung and the Critique of Modern Skepticism in McDowell and Hegel. Internationales Jahrbuck des Deutschen Idealismus, 3, 179–207.Google Scholar
Conant, J. (2016). Why Kant is not a Kantian. Philosophical Topics, 44 (1), 75–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVries, W. (2017). Hegelian Spirits in Sellarsian Bottles. Philosophical Studies, 174 (7), pp. 1643–1654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeVries, W. (2021). Brandom and a Spirit of Trust. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 29 (2), 236–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazit, Y. (2022). Forgiveness as an Approach to the History of Philosophy. Journal of Transcendental Philosophy, 3 (1), 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giladi, P. and Sachs, C., eds. (2019). Hegel and Sellars: A Special Issue of the International Journal of Philosophical Studies. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 27 (3), 359–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halbig, C. (2008). Varieties of Nature in Hegel and McDowell. In Lindgaard, J., ed., John McDowell: Experience, Norm, and Nature. Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 72–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Faith and Knowledge, trans. Cerf, W. and Harris, H. S.. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. (1991). Elements of the Philosophy of Right, ed. Wood, A., trans. Nisbet, H. B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. (2007). Philosophy of Mind. ed. Inwood, M., trans. Wallace, W. and Miller, A. V.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hegel, G. W. F. (2018). The Phenomenology of Spirit, trans. Pinkard., T. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Honneth, A. (2021). Demoralizing Recognition: Comments on Brandom, R., A Spirit of Trust. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 103 (3), 714–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2009–10). McDowell, Hegel, and the Phenomenology of Spirit. The Owl of Minerva, 41 (1/2), 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlgate, S. (2020). Review of A Spirit of Trust: A Reading of Hegel’s Phenomenology. Notre Dame Philosophy Review, https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/a-spirit-of-trust-a-reading-of-hegels-phenomenology/ (Accessed July 10, 2024).Google Scholar
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of Pure Reason, ed., and trans. Guyer, P. and Wood, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kern, A, (2022). Self-Consciousness and the Idea of Bildung: Hegel’s Radicalization of Kant. In Boyle, M. and Mylonaki, E., eds., Reason in Nature: New Essays on Themes from John McDowell. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 285–308.Google Scholar
Lance, M. (2009). Placing in a Space of Norms: Neo-Sellarsian Philosophy in the Twenty-First Century. In Misak, C., ed., The Oxford Handbook of American Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 403–429.Google Scholar
Levine, S. (2015). McDowell, Hegel, and Habits. Hegel Bulletin, 36 (2), 184–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, S. (2019). Pragmatism, Objectivity, and Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, S. (2023). Brandom on Hegel and the Retrospective Determination of Intention. Hegel Bulletin, 44 (3), 446–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (1996a). Response to Perception and Rational Constraint. Philosophical Issues, 7, 290–300.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (1998). Mind, Value, and Reality. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (2002). Response to Pippin. In Smith, N., ed., Reading McDowell. London: Routledge Press, pp. 274–277.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (2002a). Knowledge and the Internal Revisited. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 64 (1), 97–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2007). Hegel and the Myth of the Given. In Welsch, W. and Vieweg, K., eds., Das Interesse des Denk ens – Hegel aus heutiger Sicht. Paderborn: Brill/Fink, pp. 74–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2008). Response to Halbig. In Lindgaard, J., ed., John McDowell: Experience, Norm, and Nature. Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 219–225.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (2009). Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel, and Sellars. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (2009–10). Response to Stephen Houlgate. The Owl of Minerva, 41 (1/2), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2009–10a). Response to Stephen Houlgate’s Response. The Owl of Minerva, 41 (1/2), 53–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2010). Autonomy and Its Burdens. The Harvard Review of Philosophy, 17, 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2017). Why Does it Matter to Hegel that Geist has a History? In Zuckert, R. and Kreines, J, eds., Hegel on Philosophy in History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–32.Google Scholar
McDowell, J. (2018). What Is the Phenomenology About? In Sanguinetti, F. and Abath, A., eds., McDowell and Hegel. Berlin: Springer Verlag, pp. 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, J. (2020). Brandom on the Introduction to the Phenomenology. In Bouché, G., ed., Reading Brandom: on A Spirit of Trust. London: Routledge Press, pp. 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinkard, T. (2018). McDowell’s Hegel: Quietism versus the Dialectic. Revista Eletrônica Estudos Hegelianos, 15 (25), 18–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (2002). Leaving Nature Behind: or Two Cheers for “Subjectivism.” In Smith, N., ed., Reading McDowell. London: Routledge Press, pp. 58–75.Google Scholar
Pippin, R. (2006). Recognition and Reconciliation: Actualized Agency in Hegel’s Jena Phenomenology. In Deligorgi, K., ed., Hegel: New Directions. Chesham: Acumen, pp. 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (2007). Brandom’s Hegel. In Hammer, E., ed., German Idealism: Contemporary Perspectives. London: Routledge Press, pp. 153–180.Google Scholar
Pippin, R. (2008). Hegel’s Practical Philosophy: Rational Agency as Ethical Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (2018). Reason in Action: A Response to McDowell on Hegel. In Sanguinetti, F. and Abath, A. J., eds., McDowell and Hegel. Berlin: Springer Verlag, pp. 211–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (2021). All for One and One for All: Robert Brandom’s A Spirit of Trust. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 103 (3), 728–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redding, P. (2007). Analytical Philosophy and the Return of Hegelian Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedgwick, S. (2000). Hegel, McDowell, and Recent Defenses of Kant. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 31 (3), 229–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sachs, C. (2019). A Conceptual Genealogy of the Pittsburgh School: Between Kant and Hegel. In Becker, L. and Thomson, I., eds., The Cambridge History of Philosophy 1945–2015. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 664–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellars, W. (1997). Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sellars, W. (1991). Science, Perception and Reality. Atascadero: Ridgeview Publishing.Google Scholar
Stern, R. (1999). Going Beyond the Kantian Philosophy: On McDowell’s Hegelian Critique of Kant. European Journal of Philosophy, 7 (2), 247–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stern, R. (2007). Freedom, Self-Legislation, and Morality in Kant and Hegel: Constructivist vs Realist Accounts. In Hammer, E., ed., German Idealism: Contemporary Perspectives. London: Routledge Press, pp. 245–266.Google Scholar
Suther, J. (2025). The Desire for Desire: Hegel’s Constitutive Model of Rationality in Chapter IV. European Journal of Philosophy, 33 (3), 989–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, M. (2022). Forms of Nature: “First,” “Second,” “Living,” “Rational,” and “Phronetic.” In Boyle, M. and Mylonaki, E., eds., Reason in Nature: New Essays on Themes from John McDowell. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 40–79.Google Scholar
Wanderer, J. (2008). Robert Brandom. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
Wanderer, J. and Levine, S. (2013). Review of The Pittsburgh School of Philosophy by Chauncey Maher. Notre Dame Philosophical Review, https://ndpr.nd.edu/reviews/the-pittsburgh-school-of-philosophy-sellars-mcdowell-brandom/ (Accessed June 10, 2024).Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Philosophical Investigations, trans. Anscombe, G. E. M.. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this Element
complies with version 2.1 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved
user experiences and achieves the intermediate
(AA)
level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.