As I’ve been reading Stephen C. Pepper to support research into philosophy of science, I find his career as a professor of philosophy of aesthetics at U.C. Berkeley provoking.
[12] Pepper is not expounding a “philosophy of the body,” although he is closer than most of the thinkers credited with that emphasis by philosopher Thomas Hanna.19 But the entire sweep of Pepper’s work proceeds with the assumption of a human body, dynamically conceptualized, as integral. The conclusions he reaches, the methods he develops, are therefore likely to be humanly useful, in a way that would not be true of a philosopher who allowed himself to be absorbed into a mentalistic, a purely analytic, or an emotivist style of thought. Pepper’s thought is informed by common sense, personal experience, feelings, emotion, bodily existence.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070724164725/http://people.sunyit.edu/~harrell/Pepper/pep_efron.htm
A broader context of online resources to the works of Stephen C. Pepper is explicated at Archive of Work related to Stephen C. Pepper ~ 1989 | Bill J. Harrell | In brief. David Ing.
