Timeline for How much formal logic and mathematics would I have to study if I focused on continental philosophy?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 23, 2023 at 15:39 | history | edited | selfConceivedAsEvil | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
spelling
|
| Feb 23, 2023 at 9:52 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 23, 2023 at 15:39 | |||||
| Oct 27, 2014 at 4:23 | comment | added | selfConceivedAsEvil | Point being the OP has expressed interest in a particular field and your advice seems to be that it is best to seek out those who are going to sell him/her something rather different instead. I do regret having engaged you in excessive polemics, because many N.A. Philosophy departments no doubt have much to offer here -- but (again) beware the history and politics of the institution. And (again) what you have to say is only a further warning in this regard. | |
| Oct 27, 2014 at 3:09 | comment | added | virmaior | Umm.. for undergraduate departments, having this taught is part of the canon. It's not as weird as you imagine for the department to want to steer the excitement of undergraduates away from what the department thinks is not the best philosophy. Teaching != dissemination. | |
| Oct 27, 2014 at 2:35 | comment | added | selfConceivedAsEvil | @virmaior I'm not claiming the motivations are sinister -- a philosophy dept. does not have infinite resources -- nor that they are irresponsible for having carried on their tradition. I'm just pointing out their canon is not the same as that of "continental thought", "critical theory", etc. People who want to learn about, e.g., anthropology, are not going to usefully study under people who are there "only to explain why they think theories are poor [sic]". You don't like it, fine. I do not like theology and do not pretend to be interested in its dissemination... | |
| Oct 27, 2014 at 2:28 | comment | added | virmaior | I don't see how having someone to teach it is neglect. The average undergraduate only department is maybe 4 or 5 people -- of which one can teach this sort of stuff, one teaches ethics, one or two core M&E, one ancient, and one modern... I don't think that's neglect. | |
| Oct 27, 2014 at 2:22 | comment | added | selfConceivedAsEvil | @virmaior My description is substantiated by yours: "most departments..have at least one [!whoop] person competent to teach courses like [...] if only to explain why they think theories are poor". We do not disagree. Anglo-American philosophy departments have long neglected continental philosophy for the (very sound) reason that it is not part of their realm. Of course the USA has produced pre-eminent thinkers in the domain (e.g. Paul De Man) and maintains various lights. If you are strong, you can survive; my point is to beware the history and politics of the institution. | |
| Oct 27, 2014 at 1:49 | comment | added | virmaior | Not sure where in the English speaking world you are, but most departments in the USA have at least one person competent to teach courses like "existentialism" or "critical theory" if only to explain why they think theories are poor. To give just one example, NYU (no bastion of continental philosophy) employs John Richardson who list his AOS as contintental philosophy.fas.nyu.edu/page/Faculty . Chicago has John Lear. Princeton has Nehamas (philosophy.princeton.edu/people/faculty) | |
| Oct 26, 2014 at 19:34 | history | answered | selfConceivedAsEvil | CC BY-SA 3.0 |