Analytic and Continental Philosophy: Explaining the Differences

A number of writers have tackled the task of characterizing the differences between analytic and Continental philosophy. I suggest that these attempts have indeed captured the most important divergences between the two styles but have left the explanation of the differences mysterious. I argue that analytic philosophy is usefully seen as philosophy conducted within a paradigm, in Kuhn's sense of the word, whereas Continental philosophy assumes much less in the way of shared presuppositions, problems, methods and approaches. This important opposition accounts for all those features that have rightly been held to constitute the difference between the two traditions. I finish with some reflections on the relative superiority of each tradition and by highlighting the characteristic deficiencies of each.     

Crossing the Divide Within Continental Philosophy: Reconstruction, Deconstruction, Dialogue and Education

In this article I explore some points of convergence between Habermas and Derrida that revolve around the intersection of ethical and epistemological issues in dialogue. After some preliminary remarks on how dialogue and language are viewed by Habermas and Derrida as standpoints for departing from the philosophy of consciousness and from logocentric metaphysics, I cite the main points of a classroom dialogue in order to illustrate the way in which the ideas of Habermas and Derrida are sometimes received as well as the actual relevance of ethical and epistemic concerns within educational settings. I claim that such concerns cannot be sidestepped without cost and that they can be approached by combining rather than rigidly separating Habermas and Derrida. Beyond the consolidated polemics, emancipatory politics and Enlightenment priorities of truth and justice bring Habermasian reconstruction and Derridean deconstruction closer than it is typically assumed. Attention to such a convergence can enrich the teaching material of higher education courses which usually comprises either Habermasian or Derridean texts but rarely both. It can also stave off some of the risks involved in some versions of constructivism as they occur in school practice.     

On the Divide: Analytic and Continental Philosophy of Music

On offer here is a tradition‐neutral way of understanding the distinction between analytic and continental philosophy of music. The distinction is drawn in terms of methodology, rather than content, by identifying contrasting methodological tendencies of each tradition—initial maneuvers that frame an investigation, which are related to one another insofar as they involve, or do not involve, two kinds of methodological detachment. These maneuvers are extracted through a consideration of contrasting pairs of examples. The pairs consist of an analytic and a continental account of a core issue in the philosophy of music. The issues considered are musical experience, musical ontology, and the relationship between music and the emotions. The philosophers considered are Roger Scruton and Pierre Bourdieu, Jerrold Levinson and Lydia Goehr, Peter Kivy, and Andrew Bowie.     

The Identity of,and the Difference between,Analytical and Continental Philosophy

This paper intends to invoke the spirit of Hegel as the éminence grise behind analytical and continental philosophy. Both movements can be seen to originate in, or to receive a strong impetus in their development from, a repudiation of Hegel. Even Russell's quest for a systematic logical analysis of language may be seen as an attempt at a quasi- or anti-Hegelian systematicity. The collapse of this systematicity has led to the celebration of difference in both the analytical and continental schools. Another feature of contemporary philosophy is the priority given to invention and creativity over discovery. In this respect, Nietzsche is the master-figure underlying all contemporary allegiance to, and indeed, obsession with, the twin idols of creation and difference.     

Convergence and Its Limits: Relations Between Analytic and Continental Philosophy

Abstract

In this article, it is argued that a convergence between the (post-)analytic and continental traditions in philosophy is unlikely. Both traditions have fundamentally different approaches to questions concerning consciousness and subjectivity. They also differ in their conception of the role of philosophy, if we are to become autonomous and reflective humans beings.To illustrate this, a comparison is made between the work of the continental philosopher Dieter Henrich and the ‘post-analytic’ philosopher Thomas Nagel, who is often seen as a typical ‘converger‘.     

古希腊哲学与我们

西方哲学研究一直是现代中国思想发展的一个重要推动力，但长期以来，古希腊哲学并非其中最具影响的力量。古希腊哲学近来日益受到关注，是现代中国思想成熟的一个标志。而对古希腊哲学理解的加深，关键在于现代中国思想如何能够在哲学上建立与希腊古代哲学的关联，并形成自身理解古希腊哲学的研究传统。     

古代希腊哲学与医学关系探究

从起源上来看,古希腊的医学与哲学都是脱胎于原始宗教和神话。早期自然哲学虽然与原始宗教和神话研究内容相似,但它却是用理性、从自然本身解释自然现象。古代希腊哲学家们用诸如水、不定、数等来解释万物的本原,以及此后苏格拉底所开创的从个别现象中归纳出普遍性的定义法都影响了古代医学对人体和疾病现象的解释。古希腊医学兴起之后,又反过来对哲学产生影响。无论是柏拉图还是亚里士多德的哲学都深受医学观念的影响,希腊化时期的伊壁鸠鲁和斯多亚学派则更甚。