/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.1596077]

/co/mrade, fa/tg/uy and /fit/guy here

Can you guys tell me about the analytic and continental sides of philosophy? What are the main differences between these two traditions?

Here's a pic of Wittgenstein.

I was told you guys like him.

[Anonymous No.1596093]

It's basically like bacon and eggs.

The bacon is analytic philosophy: it's only one small part of an actual animal and has very well demarcated, fairly linear areas. People tend to avoid the fatty, oily parts unless nobody's looking.

Continental is your eggs: it looks demarcated, if not particularly linear, until you get into it. Then the yolk starts spreading all over the place, and you try and get some dialectic bread or toast in to mop up the runoff, but there's always some stuff that gets smeared you'll never get within a formal setting (outside of it, you might be inclined to lick the plate).

Hope that breakfast.

[Anonymous No.1596102]

>>1596093

do not try to read into this as it is bullshit.

analytic philosophy deals mainly with language logic, tends to appeal to science

continental philosophy gives you a grasp of the human experience. sociologically oriented.

[Anonymous No.1596104]

Analytic philosophy is a rigorous academic discipline.

Continental philosophy is French table talk.

[Anonymous No.1596108]

>>1596102
bacon deals mainly with language logic, tends to appeal to science

eggs gives you a grasp of the human experience. sociologically oriented.

[Anonymous No.1596110]

>>1596093
Pardon?

[Anonymous No.1596119]

>>1596104

>>1596104
>>1596104

this guy will rape the rigor out of your discipline

[Anonymous No.1596120]

God. Dammit. It's an arbitrary distinction that is too general to be discussed meaningfully. Any categorization that groups Camus, Heidegger and Baudrillard, but distinguishes them from Wittgenstein and Hume is too fucking broad.

[Anonymous No.1596122]

>>1596110
I prefer prime Bacon.

[Anonymous No.1596124]

Analytic is for autismals
Continental is for hipsters

[Anonymous No.1596129]

>>1596119

shit forgot picture

[Anonymous No.1596135]

[Anonymous No.1596136]

>>1596124
>Analytic is for autismals
>Continental is for hipsters

Might have to go with continental then.

Autistics don't get laid.

[Anonymous No.1596148]

>>1596120

>implying broad yet distinct categorization is somehow inferior

[Anonymous No.1596154]

>>1596136
Continental philosophy, being largely centered in France for the past half century (Germany before that), also understands sex as a powerful force that is deserving of serious consideration when discussing people and their lives.

Analytic philosophy concerns itself with very arcane logic problems.

Really, what you should be thinking about is utility. Continental philosophy has for more utility than analytic (unless you were involved in the hard sciences, in which case you may as well be a scientist than a philosopher of science).

[Anonymous No.1596160]

>>1596154
>>1596154

you are correct

[Anonymous No.1596163]

>>1596148
No, a broad but distinct categorization would be that bleu and cheddar are cheeses, but carrots are not. It separates the functional dietary distinctions (distinct) but does not distinguish between (situationally) trivial exemplars. Because of this, we can talk about the extra cholesterol in cheese, and the healthy vitamins in carrots, while ignoring differences like color and exact nutritional breakdown.

Calling Kant and Heidegger the same, but different from Hume does not qualify, because no substantive discussion of philosophy can result from such a categorization. It would be like saying that Cheddar and carrots are the same, but rubber is not. It's technically true, but categorizing things in this way makes it impossible to discuss the nutritional value of cheddar, carrots, or rubber, because while it still ignores trivial distinctions, it does not distinguish according to nontrivial ones.

[Anonymous No.1596174]

>>1596163

>Hume
>analytic philosophy
>no

just because he was born in england does not make him an analytic philosopher. he was an strictly a concept empiricist and a skeptic.
analytic philosophy started with frege, much later than Hume.

[Anonymous No.1596178]

>>1596174
Fuck, fine, substitute him for Russel or Wittgenstein or someone. You're on sketchy ground dividing philosophers into schools at all, and dividing three generations and several continents'-worth of philosophers into two categories generalizes their ideas to the point of absurdity.

[Anonymous No.1596195]

>>1596120
this

especially in light of more recent philosophical thought, these categories become less and less relevant/accurate

imo these are exciting times to be an academic: interdisciplinary essays and theses combine neurochemistry with philosophy, GIS with sociology, ecology with history, etc

[Anonymous No.1596222]

>>1596120
It makes sense to say that such and such university is very continental whereas this other university is ultra-analytic.

Methinks the distinction is more cultural than anything. The Western Marxism of people like Marcuse is seen as part of Continental philosophy whereas Soviet-bloc philosophy isn't

[Anonymous No.1596225]

I've noticed that it's quite easy for an analytic philosopher to be apolitical whereas that doesn't seem to be the case for continental philosophy.