Has anyone read this book?

For the discussion of philosophical books.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
RachelAnn
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:32 pm
Location: Troy, NY

Has anyone read this book?

Post by RachelAnn »

I plan to order this one, based on its review.
Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy
Editors: Tom Sorell, G. A. J. Rogers
Philosophy written in English is overwhelmingly analytic philosophy, and the techniques and predilections of analytic philosophy are not only unhistorical but anti-historical, and hostile to textual commentary. Analytic usually aspires to a very high degree of clarity and precision of formulation and argument, and it often seeks to be informed by, and consistent with, current natural science. In an earlier era, analytic philosophy aimed at agreement with ordinary linguistic intuitions or common sense beliefs, or both. All of these aspects of the subject sit uneasily with the use of historical texts for philosophical illumination. How, then, can substantial history of philosophy find a place in analytic philosophy? If history of philosophy includes the respectful, intelligent use of writings from the past to address problems that are being debated in the current philosophical journals, then history of philosophy may well belong to analytic philosophy. But if history of philosophy is more than this; if it is concerned with interpreting and reinterpreting a certain canon, or perhaps making a case for extending this canon, its connection with analytic philosophy is less clear. More obscure still is the connection between analytic philosophy and a kind of history of philosophy that is unapologetically antiquarian. This is the kind of history of philosophy that emphasises the status of a philosophical text as one document among others from a faraway intellectual world, and that tries to acquaint us with that world in order to produce understanding of the document.
Richard Baron
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:55 am
Contact:

Post by Richard Baron »

Hi RachelAnn

I have not read the book, but the contributors are a distinguished bunch:

Introduction , Tom Sorell
1. The Philosopher's History and the History of Philosophy , Anthony Kenny
2. Why Should Analytic Philosophers Do History of Philosophy? , John Cottingham
3. On Saying No to the History of Philosophy , Tom Sorell
4. Is the History of Philosophy Good for Philosophy? , Catherine Wilson
5. The History of Philosophy as Philosophy , Gary Hatfield
6. What's Philosophical About the History of Philosophy? , Daniel Garber
7. The Ideology of Context: Uses and Abuses of Context in the Historiography of Philosophy , Yves Charles Zarka
8. Locke, Therapy, and Analysis , G. A. J. Rogers
9. Richard Burthogge and the Origins of Modern Conceptualism , M. R. Ayers
10. Hope, Fear, and the Politics of Immortality , Steven Nadler

I am not sure that the alleged tension between analytic philosophy and the history of philosophy exists. To the extent that it does, its resolution may well lie in the distinction drawn by Bernard Williams, in the preface to his Descartes, between the history of philosophy and the history of ideas. For the history of ideas, the central question to ask about a text is "what did it mean?". The history of philosophy has more flexibility and can concentrate on working out what a text can contribute to current philosophical debates. At the extreme - an extreme that Williams would probably not have endorsed - we can pillage texts for useful ideas, rip the ideas out of their contexts and modify them, but a historical study would still be the starting-point even for that enterprise.

Such issues are discussed in the sample chapter from the book that is available free here:

http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-927899-7.pdf
RachelAnn
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:32 pm
Location: Troy, NY

Post by RachelAnn »

Thank you for the link to the sample chapter.
Richard, you are such a peach!
Post Reply