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.”
Ethics of Rhetoric in Times of War
What we say matters. And the way we say it matters. This is especially true in times…
How the State Failed Noelia Castillo
On March 26, Noelia Castillo, a twenty-five-year-old Spanish woman, was killed by her doctors at her own…
The Mind’s Profane and Sacred Loves
The teachers you have make all the difference in your life. That they happened to come into…