http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/ A working notebook Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:32:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-27 Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:02:11 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-27 yeah, even though I've been exposed to this stuff in Australia, I still haven't really got my head around the connection between American analytical philosophy and continental philosophy - these links just aren't there in British analytical stuff, where pragmatism is unknown. I hadn't thought of the connections you're pointing to now, so I guess I'll withdraw my previous total disbelief. yeah, even though I’ve been exposed to this stuff in Australia, I still haven’t really got my head around the connection between American analytical philosophy and continental philosophy - these links just aren’t there in British analytical stuff, where pragmatism is unknown. I hadn’t thought of the connections you’re pointing to now, so I guess I’ll withdraw my previous total disbelief.

]]> http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-26 Thu, 13 Oct 2005 02:42:03 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-26 hi Mark, Fair enough, but... In my undergrad I did a lot of analytic stuff, with some leftish continental stuff, with the two never in contact. It all became contiguous for me around the germans and analytic stuff on anti-realism/anti-foundationalism, specifically through the work of Andrew Bowie and Richard Rorty. Bowie's got great things to say about Schelling, Adorno, and Quine, which spans normal translatlantic divisions. A number of contemporary analytics have turned to continental stuff (particular quasi-Hegelian stuff) in order to deal with questions about correspondence theory of truth etc. Virno's also written extensively on Wittgenstein and others often held to be analytic philosophy of language, and the bastard social democrat sons of the Frankfurt School (like Appel) have turned to analytic philosophy as well. So I'm not sure it's quite such an artificial turn. Particularly with regard to Negri, and my concerns over him (which are the same as I have for much of marxism, basically that parts of it end up in a theodice). Negri gets a lot of mileage from Virno's work on language and Marazzi's work on language in the economy, which makes the language questions at least a point of attack. And Negri's work on Spinoza could I think be profitable addressed via Davidson on anomolous monism, as it address Spinoza (albeit in a different idiom) and might help alleviate some of Negri's occasional tendencies to flatten things. Even more interesting, though, would be to know more about the history of the analytic/continental divide and the reasons for its periodic loosening and tightening. I generally find the analytic philosophy I've read (and the people I know who get really into that stuff) to be a little staid, but also not so shrill or self-absorbed as some continental(ists). At a minimum, it's a useful conversational power play to have in one's back pocket occasionally. take care, Nate hi Mark,
Fair enough, but… In my undergrad I did a lot of analytic stuff, with some leftish continental stuff, with the two never in contact. It all became contiguous for me around the germans and analytic stuff on anti-realism/anti-foundationalism, specifically through the work of Andrew Bowie and Richard Rorty. Bowie’s got great things to say about Schelling, Adorno, and Quine, which spans normal translatlantic divisions. A number of contemporary analytics have turned to continental stuff (particular quasi-Hegelian stuff) in order to deal with questions about correspondence theory of truth etc. Virno’s also written extensively on Wittgenstein and others often held to be analytic philosophy of language, and the bastard social democrat sons of the Frankfurt School (like Appel) have turned to analytic philosophy as well. So I’m not sure it’s quite such an artificial turn. Particularly with regard to Negri, and my concerns over him (which are the same as I have for much of marxism, basically that parts of it end up in a theodice). Negri gets a lot of mileage from Virno’s work on language and Marazzi’s work on language in the economy, which makes the language questions at least a point of attack. And Negri’s work on Spinoza could I think be profitable addressed via Davidson on anomolous monism, as it address Spinoza (albeit in a different idiom) and might help alleviate some of Negri’s occasional tendencies to flatten things. Even more interesting, though, would be to know more about the history of the analytic/continental divide and the reasons for its periodic loosening and tightening. I generally find the analytic philosophy I’ve read (and the people I know who get really into that stuff) to be a little staid, but also not so shrill or self-absorbed as some continental(ists). At a minimum, it’s a useful conversational power play to have in one’s back pocket occasionally.
take care,
Nate

]]> http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-25 Wed, 12 Oct 2005 23:50:16 +0100 http://whatinthehell.blogsome.com/2005/09/21/indexicality/#comment-25 surprised to read you referencing the Germans in this regard Nate - but that's probably because I never studied them. In any case, this seems to me like crushing together analytical and continental philosophy, which becomes very manifest in the last bit. I put some stuff in a draft thesis chapter about possible worlds realism and modal logic a while back and my supervisor told me to can it. Not that it's not possible to have meaningful encounters between analytical and continental philosophy, but I don't think there's much promise in either of these ideas, certainly not the second one. surprised to read you referencing the Germans in this regard Nate - but that’s probably because I never studied them. In any case, this seems to me like crushing together analytical and continental philosophy, which becomes very manifest in the last bit. I put some stuff in a draft thesis chapter about possible worlds realism and modal logic a while back and my supervisor told me to can it. Not that it’s not possible to have meaningful encounters between analytical and continental philosophy, but I don’t think there’s much promise in either of these ideas, certainly not the second one.

]]>