What is ‘Western Philosophy’?
Lessons from the Case of ‘Analytic Philosophy’
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/jhap.v13i2.5897Abstract
Recent discussions in the history of analytic philosophy have targeted questions about the concept of ‘Analytic Philosophy’ itself. Scholars, such as Glock (2008) and Preston (2004), have argued that ‘Analytic Philosophy’ cannot plausibly be characterised in terms of necessary and sufficient conditions and that other, more pragmatic, approaches must be taken instead. In this paper, we argue that similar questions that have recently emerged about the status of ‘Western Philosophy’ can be informed by these debates in the history of analytic philosophy. Some recent scholars, most notably Platzky Miller (2023) and Cantor (2022), have argued that the concept of ‘Western philosophy’ should be abandoned altogether, due to its incoherence and the role it plays in upholding and perpetuating various exclusionary mechanisms and politically dubious aims. The aim of this paper is to apply the lessons learnt from similar discussions about ‘Analytic Philosophy’ and to build on Platzky Miller’s and Cantor’s innovative proposals. We argue that the term should not be abandoned altogether and that continuing to use it is required for combating exclusions in the history of philosophy.
References
Bird, Alexander, and Emma Tobin. 2023. “Natural Kinds.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta and Uri Nodelman, Spring 2023. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2023/entries/natural-kinds.
Buckle, Stephen. 2004. “Analytic Philosophy and Continental Philosophy: The Campbell Thesis Revised.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12: 111–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960878042000188883.
Campbell, Richard. 2001. “The Covert Metaphysics of the Clash Between ‘Analytic’ and ‘Continental’ Philosophy.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 9: 341–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608780110045335.
Cantor, Lea. 2022. “Thales – the ‘First Philosopher’? A Troubled Chapter in the Historiography of Philosophy.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 30: 727–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2022.2029347.
Connell, Sophia M., and Frederique Janssen‐Lauret. 2023. “‘Bad Philosophy’ and ‘Derivative Philosophy’: Labels That Keep Women Out of the Canon.” Metaphilosophy 54: 238–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/meta.12613.
Crenshaw, Kimberlé, Luke Charles Harris, Daniel HoSang, and George Lipsitz, eds. 2019. In Seeing Race Again: Countering Colorblindness Across the Disciplines. Oakland: University of California Press.
Dummett, Michael. 1982. “Realism.” Synthese 52: 145–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00485255.
Glock, Hans-Johann. 2008. What Is Analytic Philosophy? New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jiang, Yi, and Tongdong Bai. 2010. “Studies in Analytic Philosophy in China.” Synthese 175: 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-009-9534-8.
Platzky Miller, Josh. 2023. “From the ‘History of Western Philosophy’ to Entangled Histories of Philosophy: The Contribution of Ben Kies.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 31: 1234–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2023.2188898.
Platzky Miller, Josh, and Lea Cantor. 2023. “The Future of the History of Philosophy.” The Philosopher 111: 28–33.
Preston, Aaron. 2004. “Prolegomena to Any Future History of Analytic Philosophy.” Metaphilosophy 35: 445–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2004.00330.x.
Rée, Jonathan. 2001. “The Translation of Philosophy.” New Literary History 32: 223–57.
Rorty, Richard. 1984. “The Historiography of Philosophy: Four Genres.” In Philosophy in History: Essays in the Historiography of Philosophy, edited by Richard Rorty, Jerome B. Schneewind, and Quentin Skinner, 49–76. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625534.006.
Schuringa, Christoph. 2020. “On the Very Idea of ‘Western’ Philosophy.” Medium (blog). 2020. https://medium.com/science-and-philosophy/on-the-very-idea-of-western-philosophy-668c27b3677.
Stone, Alison. 2017. “II—Europe and Eurocentrism.” Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 91: 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1093/arisup/akw017.
Thomson, Iain D. 2019. “Rethinking the Analytic/Continental Divide.” In The Cambridge History of Philosophy, 1945–2015, edited by Kelly Becker and Iain D. Thomson, 1st ed., 569–89. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316779651.047.
Trakakis, Nick. 2012. “Doing Philosophy in Style: A New Look at the Analytic/Continental Divide.” Philosophy Compass 7: 919–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2012.00526.x.
Van Norden, Bryan W., and Jay L. Garfield. 2016. “‘If Philosophy Won’t Diversify, Let’s Call It What It Really Is.” The New York Times, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/opinion/if-philosophy-wont-diversify-lets-call-it-what-it-really-is.html.
Vrahimis, Andreas. 2018. “Is There a Methodological Divide Between Analytic and Continental Philosophy of Music? Response to Roholt: Discussion.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 76: 108–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/jaac.12421.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Public Knowledge Project recommends the use of the Creative Commons license. The Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy requires authors to agree to a Creative Commons Attribution /Non-commercial license. Authors who publish with the Journal for the History of Analytical Philosophy agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC license.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
