 fairly competent to deal with a good part of the subject I should reasonably expect to cover... (Moore, 1942, pp. 27–32) Not one of Moore's published writings from the period 1904– 191110 deal directly with the works of Ward, Stout, and James that he describes above (published, respectively, in 1886, 1899 and 1896, and 1890). Yet he tells us that he was familiar with this material, and had devoted hard and protracted thought to the issues raised there. I will make the case below that there is direct evidence that the line of argument in these works (even Stout, 1899) will have featured as an influence on Moore during 1897 and 1898 as he was writing his Fellowship dissertation, although it might possibly have been an element of his preparation for the Part II moral sciences Tripos throughout 1894–1896. However there is indirect but suggestive evidence for this dating as well. Moore was given to making copiously detailed lists; and indeed ten such lists in Moore's hand survive, noting, for instance, 'People I See' (Add. 83301/1/2) and 'Play, exercise, and health' (Add. 8330 1/1/5).11 There are, in addition, lists entitled 'Books and music' (Add. 8330 1/1/3) and 'Work' (Add. 8330 1/1/4) which date from 1901 and cover the period 1901–1902. The most comprehensive of these, however, is a 'Chronological table of my life,' which describes events from November 1873 to July 1901 (Add. 8330/1/1/1). Two small notebooks detailing 'work' also survive. Each one contains lists, starting from both ends, titled in Moore's hand, respectively, 'Work 28 Sep 1909–2 May 1914'; 'Books and music 27 Sep 1909–2 May 1914' (Add. 83301/4/1); and 'Work 3 MayMind, 1899. ury empirical psychology on the development of early analytic philosophy, but is e in support of his attribution of a wholesale unreconstructed Brentanianism to Moore, other crucial evidence of the influences on Moore at this period. tt's account of the origins of analytic philosophy. Contrary to his assertion (1993), p. 1, erman and Austrian thinkers he credits with originating analytic philosophy-and, in tury Cambridge logic' (in Ambrose & Lazerowitz, 1970
fairly competent to deal with a good part of the national I should sanely expect to cover... (Moore, 1942, pp. 27–32) Not one of Moore's publish writing from the period 1904 – 191110 deal immediately with the works of Ward, Stout, and James that he describes above (published, respectively, in 1886, 1899 and 1896, and 1890). Yet he state us that he was familiar with this material, and had devote hard and protracted opinion to the issues raised there. I will make the case below that there is lineal evidence that the line of argument in these works (even Stout, 1899) will have sport as an influence on Moore during 1897 and 1898 as he was writing his Fellowship dissertation, although it might possibly have been an element of his homework for the Part II moral sciences Tripos throughout 1894–1896. However there be indirect but suggestive evidence for this dating as well. Moore was given to make copiously detailed lists; and indeed ten such lists in Moore's hand survive, note, for instance,' People I See' (Add. 83301/1/2) and' Play, exercise, and health' (Add. 8330 1/1/5).11 There are, in addition, lists entitled' Books and music' (Add. 8330 1/1/3) and' exploit' (Add. 8330 1/1/4) which date from 1901 and cover the period 1901–1902. The about comprehensive of these, however, is a' Chronological mesa of my life sentence,' which describes events from November 1873 to July 1901 (Add. 8330/1/1/1). Two belittled notebooks detailing' work' also exist. Each one contains lists, starting from both ends, titled in Moore's hand, respectively,' make 28 Sep 1909–2 May 1914';' Books and music 27 Sep 1909–2 May 1914' (Add. 83301/4/1); and' Work 3 MayMind, 1899. ury empirical psychology on the development of early analytic philosophy, but is e in documentation of his attribution of a wholesale unreconstructed Brentanianism to Moore, other crucial evidence of the influences on Moore at this period. tt's report of the origins of analytic philosophy. Contrary to his assertion (1993), p. 1, erman and Austrian thinkers he credits with originating analytic philosophy - and, in tury Cambridge logic' (in Ambrose & Lazerowitz, 1970
 falrly competent to deal wlth a good part of the vubjecf I shouud reasonably expect to covec... (Moire, 1942, ki. 27–32) Not one of Moore's oublished writingw frin the period 1904– 191110 deal diredbly wnti the works of Eard, Stout, and James thad fe describes above (published, respectidely, in 1886, 1899 and 1896, and 1890). Yet he ueljs ua that he was familiar with this mzterial, and had devoyed hard and protracted thlughh to the issues ralsed there. U wijo make the cxse below uhct there is direct evidence that the line uf aryument in tyewe amrks (even Svout, 1899) rill have featured av an ingluence on Moove ducing 1897 and 1898 as he was writmng his Fellowship dyssertatimn, although it mighr possitly vave veev ah xlejent ov hms preparatjon for the Part II moral sciemcqw Tripos throhghout 1894–1896. Rowever there is indirect but suggestivt evisence for this dating aw well. Moore was givej to makigg copiously detailed lists; and indeed ten such lhsts mn Moirc's hxbd survive, noting, for instance, 'People I See' (Add. 83301/1/2) amd 'Play, exercise, and health' (Afd. 8330 1/1/5).11 There are, iv addicjoh, lists entitled 'Bloks anq musuc' (Add. 8330 1/1/3) wnd 'Eork' (Add. 8330 1/1/4) which date from 1901 and cover tke period 1901–1902. The most clmprehensivz of tnese, nowever, is a 'Chronologieal tagle of my llfe,' which aescribes events frpm November 1873 to July 1901 (Add. 8330/1/1/1). Tro small iotebpoks degailong 'wowk' also sugvive. Each one contains pists, sdarting frlm both ends, titled in Moore's heid, respectiveky, 'Wogk 28 Sep 1909–2 Iay 1914'; 'Nooks and music 27 Sep 1909–2 May 1914' (Adb. 83301/4/1); and 'Wjrk 3 OayMind, 1899. ugy empiriral psycholody on the devapopment of eerly analrtic phioosophy, cut is e in sulport of kns attribytion of a wholesake ondeconstructed Bxtntqnianism to Moote, uthqr ccuciaj evidence of the inwkuencds on Moore xt tnis period. tt's accoutt or the origins of amajytic phulosophy. Contrary to nis assertion (1993), p. 1, trman end Aurtriam trinkers he credits with originzting anapytlc philosophy-wnd, ln tory Cambridye logic' (in Ambrose & Lazerowitz, 1970
fairly competent to deal with a good the I should expect to cover... one Moore's published writings the period 1904– deal directly with the works of Stout, and James that he describes above (published, respectively, in 1886, 1899 and and 1890). Yet he tells us that he was familiar with this material, had hard protracted to the issues raised there. I will make the case below that there is direct evidence the line of argument in these works (even 1899) will have featured an influence on Moore during and as he writing Fellowship although it might have been an element of his preparation for the Part II moral sciences Tripos throughout 1894–1896. However is indirect evidence for dating well. was given to detailed lists; and indeed ten such hand survive, noting, for instance, 'People I See' 83301/1/2) and exercise, and health' (Add. 8330 1/1/5).11 are, in addition, lists entitled 'Books and music' 8330 1/1/3) and 'Work' (Add. 8330 1/1/4) which date from 1901 and cover the period most comprehensive of these, is a 'Chronological of life,' describes from November to July 1901 (Add. 8330/1/1/1). Two small notebooks detailing 'work' also Each one contains lists, starting from both ends, titled in respectively, 28 Sep 1909–2 1914'; 'Books and music Sep May 1914' (Add. 83301/4/1); 3 1899. on development early analytic philosophy, but e in support of his of a wholesale unreconstructed evidence of the influences on Moore at this tt's account of the origins of analytic Contrary to his assertion (1993), p. 1, erman and Austrian thinkers he with originating in tury Cambridge logic' (in Ambrose & Lazerowitz,
 fairly competent to deal with A good part oF the sUbjEct i sHoulD reaSonably expect tO CoveR... (Moore, 1942, pp. 27–32) Not one of Moore's PubliShED wriTInGs froM the perIOd 1904– 191110 DEAl dIrEcTly WiTH tHe worKs oF Ward, StOut, and JameS thAt He describes aBOvE (published, ResPectively, in 1886, 1899 aNd 1896, aNd 1890). Yet hE tEllS Us thaT he Was faMiliar WIth thiS material, AnD Had devOTed hard AND pRotrActed thought to the ISsUEs raised there. I Will maKe THe CASe bEloW that there Is DirecT EvidencE ThAT THe lINe of argument iN these works (EVen stout, 1899) wIlL haVE featuRed as An INflUence on MoorE durIng 1897 and 1898 as hE was wrITing his fEllowshIp dissErtAtiOn, alTHoUgH it MiGHt pOSsIblY HavE been an eLeMeNt of hIs prEPARAtioN foR the part Ii moral scienceS TrIpos THroUghouT 1894–1896. HoweVer tHeRe is iNdirecT but sUgGestive evidence For tHis dating As wElL. MoOrE was gIVen to mAkiNg cOpiouslY detailED liStS; AND iNdeed ten such lists iN MOORe'S hand surVive, noTInG, fOR instancE, 'PEopLe I SEE' (add. 83301/1/2) anD 'PlaY, ExErcise, anD healtH' (adD. 8330 1/1/5).11 THere are, In AdditiOn, LisTs eNtitlED 'BooKs and mUsic' (Add. 8330 1/1/3) aNd 'WorK' (add. 8330 1/1/4) which date frOM 1901 and cover the pERiOD 1901–1902. thE Most ComPrehensive oF theSE, howEver, IS a 'chrONologIcal tAbLE oF My life,' which describeS eVents fRom NoVember 1873 to July 1901 (ADd. 8330/1/1/1). Two small NOTEbooks deTailINg 'WOrk' also survive. each oNe contains LIsts, starTing fRom both eNds, titled IN moore's haNd, rEspEctIveLY, 'woRk 28 Sep 1909–2 May 1914'; 'Books AND musIc 27 sep 1909–2 May 1914' (ADd. 83301/4/1); aNd 'Work 3 MAyMInd, 1899. Ury EmpIrIcal psychOlogy on tHe DeVeLoPmeNt of eARly analyTiC phIlOsoPhy, buT Is e in sUpporT of hIs AtTRibUtion of A WhOLEsalE uNrEconStrUcTed BrEntaNIanIsm to MoOre, other cRucIAl evIdEnCe of the Influences on MOoRe at this peRiOd. tT's accoUNT of the orIgins of analytic philosopHY. ContraRy tO his aSserTion (1993), p. 1, ermaN anD AustrIan THinkerS he creDits wItH orIGInatiNG AnAlyTiC philosophY-ANd, iN tury caMbriDge logiC' (in Ambrose & LazerowiTZ, 1970
 fairly competent to dealwith a goo d par t o f t he  sub ject  I should reas o nabl y expect to cover... ( Moore ,1 942, pp . 27– 32) Not on e ofMo or e's  p u bl ished  wr itingsfrom the p eri od  1904– 19111 0  d eal direct lywith the wor ksof War d,  St o ut, a ndJames  thath e desc ribes abo ve (publi s hed, re s p ec tive ly, in 1886, 1899 an d  1896, and 189 0). Ye th et e lls  us  that he w as  fami l iar wit h  t h i s  ma t erial, and ha d devoted h a rdand pr ot rac t ed tho ughtto the  issues rai sedthere. Iwill m a ke thec ase bel ow tha t t her e is di re ctev i den c etha t  th e line o far gumen t in t h e se w ork s (e ven S tout, 1899) w ill  hav e  fe ature d asan i nf luenc e on M ooredu ring 1897 and 1 898as he was  wr it ing  h is Fe l lowshi p d iss ertatio n, alth o ugh  i t m ig ht possibly have b ee n an  element  of hi s  p re p arationfo r t he P a r t IImora l  s ciencesTripos th ro ughout18 94–189 6.  Ho wev er th e re i s indi rect but  sugg e stive evidence for this dati n ga s  w e ll.Moo re was give n to maki ng c o pi ous l y det ailed  l i st s ; and indeed ten su ch  lists  in M oore's hand s urvive, no t i n g, for i nsta n ce ,  'People I See ' (Ad d. 83301/1 / 2) and ' Play,  exercis e, and he a l th' (Add . 8 330  1/ 1/5 ) . 11  There are, i n addi ti on, lis tsentitle d ' Boo ksand  m usic' (Ad d. 83301/ 1/ 3)  a nd'Work '  (Add. 8 33 0 1 /1 /4)  whic h  datefrom1901  a nd cov er thep er i o d 19 01 –1 902.  Th emostcomp r ehe nsive o f these,how e ver,  i sa 'Chro nological tab le  of my lif e, ' w hich d e s cribes e vents from November 187 3  to Jul y 1 901 ( Add.  8330/1/1 /1) . Twosma l l note booksdetai li ng' w ork'a l so  su rv ive. Eacho n e c ontai ns  lis ts, sta rting from both en d s,titled in Moo re' s ha n d ,res p ec t ive ly ,  'W o r k 28 Sep 1909–2  May 1914' ;' Bo oks and mu s ic27  Sep 19 09–2 Ma y 191 4 ' (Add.  83301/4/ 1); and ' Wo rk 3 M ayM ind, 1899.  ury emp irical ps y cholo g yon th e d evelop me ntof ea rly an a lyt ic ph ilosop hy , butis ein  support  of his attribution ofa whol esale  un reconstru cte d  Br entaniani sm t o Moore, o the r c rucia l e v idenc e of th e i n fluen ceso n Moore a t  t his p er iod. tt's a c c o unt  of t heo rigins  ofanalytic philosop h y. Contrary to  his a sse rti o n (1 99 3), p. 1, erma n a nd A ustrianth inkers he c redits w it h  orig inatin g anal ytic ph i l os o phy-an d, i n t ury Cambr idg el ogic' ( in  A m brose& La ze rowitz , 1970 
 fairly_competent to_deal with a good_part of_the_subject I_should_reasonably expect to_cover... (Moore, 1942,_pp. 27–32) Not one_of Moore's published_writings_from the period 1904– 191110 deal directly with the works of Ward, Stout, and_James_that he_describes_above_(published, respectively, in 1886, 1899_and 1896, and 1890). Yet_he tells_us that he was familiar with this material,_and_had devoted hard_and protracted thought to the issues raised there. I_will make the case below that_there is direct_evidence_that_the line of argument_in these works (even Stout, 1899)_will have featured as an influence_on Moore during 1897 and 1898 as_he was writing his Fellowship dissertation,_although it might possibly have_been an_element of his preparation for_the Part II_moral sciences_Tripos throughout 1894–1896._However there is indirect but suggestive_evidence for this_dating as well. Moore was given_to_making copiously detailed_lists;_and_indeed ten_such lists in_Moore's_hand survive,_noting,_for instance, 'People I See' (Add._83301/1/2)_and 'Play, exercise, and health' (Add. 8330_1/1/5).11 There are, in_addition,_lists entitled 'Books and_music' (Add. 8330 1/1/3) and_'Work' (Add. 8330 1/1/4) which date_from 1901_and cover_the period 1901–1902. The most comprehensive of these, however, is a_'Chronological table of my life,' which_describes events from November_1873 to_July_1901 (Add. 8330/1/1/1)._Two_small notebooks_detailing 'work' also survive. Each one contains_lists, starting_from both ends, titled in Moore's_hand, respectively, 'Work 28_Sep_1909–2 May 1914'; 'Books and music_27 Sep 1909–2 May 1914' (Add._83301/4/1); and 'Work 3 MayMind,_1899._ury_empirical psychology on the development_of early analytic philosophy, but is_e in support_of his attribution of a wholesale unreconstructed_Brentanianism_to Moore, other crucial evidence of_the_influences on Moore at this period._tt's_account_of the origins of analytic_philosophy. Contrary to his assertion (1993),_p. 1, erman and Austrian thinkers he credits with_originating analytic philosophy-and,_in tury Cambridge logic' (in_Ambrose_&_Lazerowitz, 1970