Quote:

---

Continental appears to be more focused on big questions

---

They pretty much used the same font.

Quote:

---

I think it's a bunch of bullshit, myself, But I tell you this, man, I tell you this. I don't know what's gonna happen, man, but I wanna have my kicks before the whole shithouse goes up in flames.

---

Quote:

---

Mr. Cypher said:
Analytic seems to be more focused on philosophy of language and being precise about what specifically is being communicated, and also deals with very technical questions of narrow interest.  Continental appears to be more focused on big questions like aesthetics, morality and the meaning of life and is more literary/poetic than the dry analytic stuff.

at least this is my limited perspective from having attended a few college classes

---

Quote:

---

Silversoul said:
Other than the geographic regions associated with each, what are some of the basic differences between the two?  I do notice a different feel to the works of someone Bertrand Russel or John Rawls on the one hand versus Michel Foucalt or Martin Heidegger on the other hand, but I can't quite put my finger on what that difference is.  Is it just a stylistic difference?  Or is there a difference in the kind of logic applied to their philosophies?

---

You forgot the most important works of Alfred E. Newman.

Quote:

---

Icelander said:

Quote:

---

Silversoul said:
Other than the geographic regions associated with each, what are some of the basic differences between the two?  I do notice a different feel to the works of someone Bertrand Russel or John Rawls on the one hand versus Michel Foucalt or Martin Heidegger on the other hand, but I can't quite put my finger on what that difference is.  Is it just a stylistic difference?  Or is there a difference in the kind of logic applied to their philosophies?

---

You forgot the most important works of Alfred E. Newman.

---

Quote:

---

amuzakat said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_philosophy

---

Quote:

---

Mr. Mushrooms said:
Yeah, pretty much a "Google it" question.

---

Quote:

---

Where analytic philosophy tends to treat philosophy in terms of discrete problems, capable of being analyzed apart from their historical origins (much as scientists consider the history of science inessential to scientific inquiry), continental philosophy typically suggests that "philosophical argument cannot be divorced from the textual and contextual conditions of its historical emergence".

---

Quote:

---

Lakefingers said:
E.g. is it arbitrary that British and to an extent American philosophers are highly hung  up on discrediting Heidegger based solely on his Nazism?

---

Quote:

---

There is no "coherent, definitive answer" because there is no coherent definitive border between them.

---

Quote:

---

Read what you want to. Disregard the labels and the politics involved, unless you're applying for graduate school or shooting for a good grade in philosophy, then you must choose your prose, subject and method wisely to suit the vanity of your supervisor and institution.

---

Quote:

---

Lakefingers said:

Quote:

---

Mr. Mushrooms said:

Quote:

---

Lakefingers said:
E.g. is it arbitrary that British and to an extent American philosophers are highly hung  up on discrediting Heidegger based solely on his Nazism?

---

---

Are you suggesting all analytics do this?

---

No. That's why I did not use the definite article or a universal adjective before British...

---

Yes, but the article or universal adjective may be implied that is why I asked.

I speak the King's English.  Elvis, that is.

Quote:

---

Lakefingers said:

Quote:

---

Mr. Mushrooms said:
One commonality both philosophies share--a misunderstanding of reality, most notably in my view, regarding metaphysics.

---

One of the causes of this is that the philosophy of a person gets tied to other people and becomes a school, somehow seeming so much more well-founded and real than the philosophy of one thinker.

---

Yes, that's a problem.  Then, on the other hand, you get system builders and philosophers acting as poets in the sense that they work alone.  Philosophy has suffered in the process.