Is this book an assualt on analytic philosophy or am I misreading

>>9115964
You don't know what analytic philosophy is. And no.

>>9115968
Is analytic philosophy not heavily focused on logic and reason removed from phenomenology? Because thats what it seems like Dosto is critisizing here

>>9115964
The reason I think this btw, is because I just finished the part of the book where Porfiry lectured Rask about how the youth are so in love with their own logic and formulations, but how logic will fail you in the end because it cant account for everything. Specifically he talks about how he catches criminals because they rely on their own reason and wit to get away with crimes but they always forget to take into account unexpected variables and human nature, their own psychology betrays them in the end and gives them away

>>9116062
I wouldn't say it's so much about logic vs. humanity as it is about abstracted morality and sense of ego vs. "innate" morality and self

>>9115972
"analytic philosophy" per se wasn't a thing when Dosto was alive

>>9115972
>>9116086
(Utilitarianism, however, was a thing...hint hint OP!)

>>9116071
Ah ok. This is kind of what I was trying to articulate, but Im very poory spoken

>>9116086
Yes, Im aware the analytic and contiental werent really things in his time, but it seems to me like he was critisizing the type of thiniking that would later be called analytic

>>9116110
yeah, you could certainly draw a line between Bentham, Mill, and later Anglophone philosophy.