• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • (sub)Text
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Philosophy vs. Improv
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

The Great Divide: Concerning the Battle Between Analytic and Continental Philosophy

January 26, 2013 by Rian Mitch 6 Comments

[Editor's Note: We're happy here to present a first blog post for us by Rian Mitch (submitted in response to our recent call for more bloggers). Rian was one of the voices on our Deleuze Not School discussion, whom we met when he took us to task via email for our slipshod treatment of Derrida on ep. 51. He consequently has been leading a Derrida Not School group.]

A recurrent topic on PEL has been the distinction between the analytic and continental schools of philosophy. In this NY Times Opinionator piece from last year, Gary Gutting, chair of the philosophy department at Notre Dame, gives an account of the history of this division. Gutting himself decides to play it almost neutral, allowing a historic reduction of the origins of both continental and analytic philosophy. This article does little good if you're trying to decide where you stand, but it does provide insight into the ridiculous shouting match between the two schools.

Though it seems contrived, this split between Americans/British (Analytics) and the rest of the world (Continental) is an ongoing issue in the professional world (and the fact that some deny that the distinction is legitimate at all is part of the debate itself). One could question whether Gutting's slant is correct, with his opinion of an analytic superiority obviously impacting his words; you'd likely want to check out a few more articles and authors for yourself before following his lead. Still, the article provides some value in sketching out the strengths and weaknesses of each of the schools. Gutting suggests a few areas where each of the schools could take a lesson or two by addressing the overlapping areas of interest in modern day philosophy. Overall, the article gives some nice groundwork to feel your way around this aspect of philosophical discourse today.

Read the NY Times piece.

-Rian Mitch

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Web Detritus Tagged With: analytic vs. continental philosophy, Gary Guttling, philosophy blog, The Stone

Comments

  1. Billie Pritchett says

    January 27, 2013 at 2:49 am

    In some respects, both ‘traditions’ have logic-focused godfathers who apparently did work independently: Bernard Bolzano (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bolzano/) of the Continental tradition, who influenced Edmund Husserl, and of course Gottlob Frege of the Analytic tradition, who influenced Bertrand Russell.

    Reply
  2. qapla says

    June 5, 2013 at 5:25 pm

    Brian Leiter on the Analytic/Continental Distinction mp3

    http://philosophybites.com/2011/12/brian-leiter-on-the-analyticcontinental-distinction.html

    Reply
    • dmf says

      June 5, 2013 at 5:38 pm

      heh, google Leiter and Ayn Rand some time…
      one of the many axes he grinds along with his distaste for most contemporary continental philosophy

      Reply
      • qapla says

        June 5, 2013 at 5:50 pm

        Will do!

        thank you

        Reply
  3. Wayne Schroeder says

    June 5, 2013 at 7:01 pm

    I missed this post by Rian until now. I appreciated a couple of responders from the commentary section (quoted below) on the divide between Analytic vs Continental which can be described in many ways. What I notice is that we all seem to have a preferential way of thinking more one way than the other, perhaps the difference between the logical and intuitional, or a more basic cut to how we think, with the best being able to use either as relevant. This basic preference seems to be the egg that comes before the chicken, although we think we are being correct, or objective depending on our preference. The next time I’m at the store I think I will order an egg and a chicken and see which one comes first. In any event, I hope this divide in thinking can continue to be mutually informative, as opposed to oppositional.

    chris brooklyn, ny:
    Analytics seem to want “Truth,” while continentals want to understand “truthS,” and sometimes create new ones. Analytics seek to make language “clear” so to get at “the Truth,” while continentals see language as productive of “truthS.” Two different ways of looking at the role of philosophy in the world.

    Alex, Pennsylvania
    This article seems to be less about bridging the gap between the traditions and more about how/why continental philosophy should become more analytic. Language is often inadequate for the task at hand. Being and Time is a prime example of this. When language is not up to the task one can either go another direction (ignoring whatever obscurity is there) or try to articulate the best one can (even though this may be an impossible task). In a quest for clarity isn’t it possible that something can be ignored or covered up? Is the obscure not worthy of discussion?

    Moreover, the suggestion to simply read “analytic commentaries” seems to open up worlds of possible errors. What if the interruption in the commentary is unusual, unhelpful, or worst obscure? How are commentaries to elucidate texts if the audience of the commentary doesn’t have first hand experience with the primary text? This would be like doing historical analysis with secondary sources because primary sources are obscure (perhaps in a different language?). Or instead of reading Plato simply reading what Roman commentaries have to say. Commentaries can be helpful and clarifying, but primarily when one ‘knows what’s on the table’ or as some experience with the primary text. This piece is not a bridge, it’s a reduction to homogenization. Obviously, this is a slight exaggeration, but someone who works on “contemporary French philosophy” as a specialty should have a better appreciation for the significance of difference.

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Philosophy as Conceptual Border Patrol | The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast | A Philosophy Podcast and Blog says:
    March 6, 2013 at 11:41 pm

    […] Peter Hacker does not abide nonsense. In his January article “Why Philosophy” Hacker puts in his cross-hairs ideas taken seriously by politicians, scientists, and the intelligentsia in general. Let’s get to the specifics in a minute – the general outline is relevant to anyone hoping to grok the never-ending attempt to define philosophy. Perhaps this attempt never ends because there’s no exhaustive definition available, or perhaps the activity is perpetual because of distinct approaches and traditions even within the “Eurocentric” philosophical tradition (see Rian Mitch’s post on the Analytic/Continental Divide). […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PEL Live Show 2023

Brothers K Live Show

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Select list(s):

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • Seth Paskin on PEL Eulogies Nightcap Late March 2023
  • John Heath on PEL Eulogies Nightcap Late March 2023
  • Randy Strader on Ep. 309: Wittgenstein On Certainty (Part Two)
  • Wes Alwan on PEL Nightcap February 2023
  • Kunal on Why Don’t We Like Idealism?

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Ad-Free
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Supporter Exclusive
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2023 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2023 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in