A new collection of the writings of Henry James Jr. on fiction as an art, published by NYRB Classics, has drawn my attention. A reviewer of the collection quotes HJ saying, "The old superstition about fiction being 'wicked' has doubtless died out in England, but the spirit of it lingers in a certain oblique regard directed towards any story which does not more or less admit it is only a joke.” Some of James’s eminent contemporaries were casualties of the notion that fiction was a moral embarrassment — that its very falsity amounted to a sort of nefarious deception. In the novels of Anthony Trollope, for instance, James detected “a suicidal satisfaction in reminding the reader that the story he was telling was only, after all, a make-believe." Becca Rothfeld, reviewing this collection for WaPo, wonders whether we are to take this as a banner James was raising on behalf of his own work. Come into my tent, he would be saying and get fiction that is not apologe...
" ‘Concrete reality’ contrasts with ‘abstract reality’: some hold that numbers and concepts are real things, part of reality, but are abstract entities rather than concrete entities. One quick way to characterize concrete reality is to say that to be concretely real is to be capable of entering into causal relations." That is Galen Strawson. Note the careful wording: this is a "quick way" of distinguishing concrete from abstract. Strawson is not presuming to offer it as a definition. This quote shows Strawson preparing to set out metaphysical views of his own, he is here speaking NOT in a history-of-philosophy context. But it brings to mind that, as my friend Henry has mentioned in comments on this blog, Strawson has set out a view of Humean notions of causation in which Hume's view is not what it has commonly been taken to be. Hume meant, Strawson says, only that our experience of causation is limited to correlation, not that the fact of ca...