The task for me is to get myself into a position in which I am able to criticize Collingwood.
Right now I am too busy immersing myself in his thinking, trying to arrive at some kind of clearer picture of his mind.
For a long time this is how I felt about Foucault. I felt like I was in a position where I was totally dominated by his books. I couldn't begin to criticize them because I was fully involved in understanding them. I got to a much better position with Foucault. I certainly don't completely command Foucault's oeuvre. But I certainly have spent enough time with it that I feel comfortable making certain criticisms, or appropriating him in ways that I see fit. I feel like I grasp him enough to criticize him at times. I grasp enough to use him as a tool.
I'm not quite there with Collingwood yet.
I'm reading The Principles of History and that is helping. But it is so short and some of it I've read before.
I want to read The Idea of Nature.
I was glancing at his Essay on Philosophical Method.
I'm curious about it.
I'm ready to keep reading him.
I'm about to begin writing on his notion of duty and its role in The New Leviathan.
I'm ready to keep working with him.