People concerned with the big questions of philosophy, or with cross-cultural philosophy, often reach a quick disillusionment with analytic philosophy – the standard approach of academic philosophy departments. The name is apt, as the approach is typically more concerned with analysis than synthesis; the characteristic method is to divide our fuzzy, vague everyday concepts into ever more precise and specific concepts, referring more and more exactly to smaller and smaller things. Analytic philosophers have typically seen the history of philosophy (Western or otherwise) as interesting but not important. The analytic philosopher W.V.O. Quine once quipped that there are two kinds of philosophers: those who do philosophy, and those who do the history of philosophy.
There is value in the analytic approach, best seen when compared to its main opponent, the French “continental” tradition (especially postmodernism). A “continental” philosophy department typically pays much more attention to the great questions, to the history of philosophy, and even to non-Western traditions. (Full disclosure: continental philosophy departments have generally shown considerably more interest in hiring me than analytic ones have.)
What you will find far less of in “continental” philosophy, however, is any discussion of truth. Continental philosophers’ writings tend to work in an exegetical mode: Heidegger said this, Lévinas said that, Foucault said the other thing. But was Heidegger or Foucault right? Much Continental work seems to shy away from such questions, sometimes acting merely as a mouthpiece for the philosopher being explained. Often the reasoning given, based on thinkers like Jacques Derrida, is that truth doesn’t exist in the first place; all that’s left is text and more text. But such an approach makes one see why Quine made his quip.
My own quip: analytic philosophy is truth without significance, continental philosophy is significance without truth. I would like to look for both.
Stephen C. Walker said:
I once read a further quip to the effect that continental philosophers write so as to look like they have read everything…while analytic philosophers write so as to look like they have read nothing at all.
Amod said:
That’s really good! Some analytic philosophers do remind me of an anecdote told by a friend of my father’s. He had been visiting the MIT linguistics department in Chomsky’s heyday and they were giving him a tour. He asked where their library is, and his host was taken aback: “Library? Mr. Singh! We don’t read books – we write books!”
And yes, on the other side of things, continental philosophy can sometimes start to look like simple name dropping.
Stephen C. Walker said:
I’m reminded of that hilarious online “postmodern essay generator” wherein every other sentence drops the name of a theorist.
Topher said:
This is such an excellent beginning to a conversation about philosophy, Amod: how indeed shall we find significance and truth? Frankly, I had to give up the search on those terms, after I realized my skepticism could trump all truth claims. Instead of developing my own worldview from first principles, I decided to trust in others’, specifically the Christian. Since making that decision, I found and took to heart a quote from the young Christian philosopher James KA Smith: “We confess knowledge without certainty, truth without objectivity.” Perhaps that puts me too firmly in the continental camp for your comfort, but it’s a resolution that works for me.
Amod said:
Welcome, Topher, and thanks for your post. I wouldn’t say that’s too firmly in the continental camp at all; my problems with that camp typically have to do with a refusal to confess knowledge and truth.
The resolution based on faith has much to recommend itself, but it’s not one I can accept myself – at least, not for now. I will see where my thoughts lead me as the years go on. In the meantime, complete skepticism can indeed be crippling; that’s why it’s important to hold onto our preexisting beliefs and challenge them only one at a time. Do you know the analogy of the leaky raft?