Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

ANALYTIC AND TRANSFORMATIVE PHILOSOPHY

100%
Rorty R.
Analiza i Egzystencja. Czasopismo Filozoficzne
|
2007
|
issue 5
5-26
EN
The paper was written in 1998 for a symposium organized in conjunction with the 50th anniversary of the School of the Humanities at Stanford University, and first published in German translation in 2000. It is mostly devoted to the history and sociology of analytic philosophy in American universities after the Second World War. The author argues that analytic movement has failed to keep its promise of putting philosophy on the secure path of a science. Thus it may not have lived up to its pretensions. A permanent, extremely valuable contribution to philosophy has been made by those analytical thinkers who undermined the scientistic pretensions of the movement. The general lesson of the paper is that this particular failure of analytic philosophy and its various internal critiques give additional strong reasons to abandon the hope of making philosophy into some sort of science.
2

K SAMOTNÉMU DĚLENÍ ANALYTICKÉ VS. KONTINENTÁLNÍ FILOZOFIE

80%
Šebela K.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2021
|
vol. 76
|
issue 7
521 – 530
EN
The paper deals with the very idea of distinction between analytical and continental philosophy, so it is primarily methodological. The aim is to criticize this division. Criticism is conducted from the point of view of analytical philosophy. The arguments are of three kinds: a) factual – evidence from the history of contemporary philosophy, pointing to analytical philosophers working on the continent (Frege, Carnap, etc.) and at the same time to non-analytical philosophers outside the continent (American pragmatism, etc.); b) methodological – it is a division of contemporary philosophy, is it complete, exclusive, what is the criterion of division? It is divided according to both geographical and systematic criteria. This will point out the illogicality of the division itself; c) power – the division is conducted by analytical philosophy as a manifestation of its hegemony, it is actually a division of analytical vs. non-analytical philosophies. Thus, in conclusion, I will focus on the possibility and necessity of dividing philosophy, such as movements, disciplines, philosophers, as well as the purposes – educational, research, etc. The division of philosophy according to problem areas is considered less misleading.
3

DIFFERENCE WITHOUT DISTINCTION? (Vidminnist bez riznytsi?)

70%
Bouveresse J.
Філософська Думка
|
2010
|
issue 1
23-43
EN
The paper is devoted to the problem of difference without distinction between the analytical and continental philosophy which cannot be formulated at the level of certain metaphilosophy but remains absolutely real and sufficiently perceptible at the level of the method used by philosophers in studying philosophy. Being far from the position of oikumenism and the idea of overcoming the distinctions of two traditions in post-analytical philosophy, the author emphasizes that, in spite of the divergences in education, style and interests which tend, to a more or less extent, to the history of philosophy, one gains an impression that the question is in two different disciplines which difference is reduced to the variation in the rules of the same (philosophic) game. The author does not think that the dialogue between representatives of those positions, which retains the latter unchanged, may be useful and will favour the rapprochement of the two philosophic traditions.
4

DIALOGUE WITHOUT RECONCILIATION. CONTINENTAL AND ANALYTICAL TRADITION IN CONTEMPORARY FRANCE (Dialoh bez prymyrennia. Kontynentalna ta analitychna tradytsii u suchasnii Frantsii).

70%
Yosypenko O.
Філософська Думка
|
2010
|
issue 1
5-22
EN
The paper is devoted to the study of controversy of the analytical and continental philosophy in contemporary France. Being far from becoming a problem of history, this controversy in the contemporary French philosophy gains the form of debate of post-modernists (J. Derrida, F. Liotard) and French admirers of the analytical philosophy (J. Bouveresse, P. Angel, S. Logier). The paper investigates the historical origins of the controversy reaching the first half of the 20th century, when the basic subjects of French philosophy were formed as such that excluded any attention to the problems raised by the English-Austrian and then by the English-American thought. The French philosophy has gone through the 'linguistic change' only in the 60's of the 20th century, but semiologic version of the language philosophy differed radically from the semantic and further linguistic philosophy developed by the analytic tradition. The authoress studies the attempt of French philosophers of the analytical trend of the 80-90's of the 20th century to renounce the ideas of philosophy and style of the thought used by the 'vanguard philosophers' of the 60-70's and the differences between the 'continental' and analytical philosophy articulated by them which rather belong to the stylistic level (clearness, argumentation, dialogue), than the content level of the theses and methods.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.