In his Oxford “very short introduction” to Continental philosophy, Simon Critchley suggests that Continental philosophy is “a professional self-description” and a “cultural feature.” The former is “a necessary – but perhaps transitory – evil of the professionalization of the disciple.” The latter is not so much a geographic conflict as “the expression of a conflict (and moreover a sectarian conflict) that is internal to ‘Englishness.” The opposition of Continental-analytic is “the expression of a deep cultural divide between differing and opposed habits of thought – let’s call them Benthamite and Coleridgean, or empirical-scientific and hermeneutic-romantic.” Citing John Stuart Mill, he suggests that it is a mistake to choose either, since that might be a matter of “mistaking a part for the whole.”
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…