There are more than two brands, but I’m restricting myself to two.
On the one hand there are the careful, balanced assessments of some writer or a collection of writers. These aim to clarify the aims and actual opinions of thinkers of the past. They rebut misinterpretations and misconstruals. Descartes didn’t really mean that , Heidegger’s opinion on X must be seen in the context of his views on Y. This is all very useful.
On the other hand are intellectual histories that trace out the impact of one thinker on another, regardless of whether the influenced thinker interpreted the influencing thinker accurately. This is also very useful, since misconstruals may actually have more impact on future thinkers than correct construals.
Which, after all, has been more influential on later thinkers, Descartes or truncated Descartes, Heidegger or pop-Heidegger, Freud or pseudo-Freud, Derrida’s actual thought or Derridean slogans ( il n’y a pas de hors-texte ) and terms (deconstruction)?
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
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…
