The difference between continental and analytic philosophy is

>>9509860
What the fuck are you talking about, there are analytical hegelians

>>9509860
Not all philosophical problems are social problems. I'm sorry you don't know enough philosophy to grasp this very simple fact. Analytical philosophy cannot be reduced to simply "definitions" just as continental philosophy cannot be reduced to "obscurantist marxist wankery".

Remember, you have to read Plato AND Aristotle to become a well-rounded human being

>>9510091
Okay, tell me one perennial problem of philosophy that is purely theoretical.

>>9510121

the entire fucking field of ontology

>>9509860

Yeah, listen: all you say is wrong.

Here's why:

1. Continental philosophy is not always concerned with social questions. Heidegger, for instance, never wrote an ethic.
2. The Platonic 'search for definitions' is a generalization you invented here - and the only way I have to interpret it as if it made sense is to suppose you have read analytic secondary literature on Plato. There are continental interpretations of Plato (Reale, Kramer, Geiser). Also, if the problem with analytics is that they are not concerned with social problems, why the fuck would Plato, who wrote a shit-ton of stuff on politics, human nature and their relation be grouped with analytics? Do you even know what the Republic is?
3. There are analytic Hegelians, Neokantians, and Marxist analytic philosophers.
4. All you write is based on that one undergraduate course you have taken in philosophy which you didn't like because you have read the Marx wikipedia page once.

9510122
Wow that's a bad example, ontology is extremely related to historical and social circumstances. Particularly if you're talking about classification, or debates between essentialism and constructivism, or process ontology. Perception of what constitutes such abstract categories as "being" is fundamentally different in the contemporary age. Social construction of reality and all that jazz.

>>9510148
more likely historical and social circumstances are derived from ontology

>>9509860
>analytic philosophy is autistic wankery
more news at 6

>>9510148
tell me how the problem of universals, the realist-anti-realist debate in mathematics and science, the mind-body problem, modal metaphysics, ontological emergentism in the physical sciences, ontology of time and causality are all "extremely related to social circumstances".

If you're still talking about "social constructions of reality" I would simply point you to the principle of non-contradiction. Ontology is as far removed from your naive relativist babble as it can possibly be

>>9510122
Will a notion of ontological truth not have moral implications?

File: 1480824007300.jpg (332KB, 888x500px) Image search: [Google]

332KB, 888x500px

>>9509860
I fucking hate those two terms, continental and analytic. As if there are species of philosophy.
There's shitty continental philosophy, and shitty analytic philosophy, as well as some good continental philosophy, and good analytic philosophy. And of those that are good, they come together quite nicely. So in the end continental and analytic are just empty terms that tell you jack shit about the concepts they circumscribe. If anything the whole dichotomy is harmful because it supposes an attitude of irreconcilability between the two when this is not the case.
But the most infuriating thing is that continental philosophy includes the germanic shitters like heidegger and schopenhauer, but not the church fathers or any scholastics. Not that I would want them to lumped in with schoppy. But it's as if the term itself was invented solely in an ignorant attempt by post-enlightenment critics to delineate patristic philosophy from the contemporary kind. And as a result schopenhauer is constantly spitting out imprecise garbage that Aquinas already explained in much greater detail and precision, but nobody will ever know because medieval/scholastic philosophy does not belong to the club of 'important philosophy' that these german brainlets occupy even though medieval philosophy is far more relevant to critical theory than this ridiculous 'dude feelings' vs 'dude verification' slump we've fallen into, meanwhile forgetting -real- metaphysics because of our unwarranted disgust for anything pre-enlightenment-but-post-ancient that we inherited from our brainlet forefathers who were busy reading voltaire and buying into romanticism and shit. Not that romanticism is not good, it was definitely a movement forward, but by rebelling against the church it was rebelling against something central to itself. Hegel knew this ofc, but what are you gunna do.

>>9512019
Basically this. But I have some hope that people are starting to see past this. If you look at philosophy in the 60s, 70s, and 80s the split was more significant. I think a lot of contemporary academic philosophy, particularly american philosophy (which might be a result of the more open tradition of pragmatism) is getting better at integrating perspectives from both schools. My university in particular (University of Pittsburgh) is pretty good at this.

>>9509860
Sorry to inform you but Hegel never thought that philosophical questions almost always resolve into social questions but in theological questions

>>9512042
cool heres my email.

>>9509860
>Mountains of analytic literature will not make an impact on how people interpret the world around them, and gain insight into how those interpretations relate to historical and political reality.

Neither will mountains of continental philosophy. The amount of people who (1) have read more than one book of continental philosophy and (2) understood it and (3) benefited from it outside of an insular academic context is basically nobody. How can continental philosophy make a difference in how people see the world when it gets harder and harder for normal people to understand or care about?

>>9511802
>Will a notion of ontological truth not have moral implications?
I don't know, I've never read Will A. Notion. Is he good?

>>9511802
Implications are posterior to the thing which they are of

>>9512019
>Muh catholic church
And Aquinas (like Augustine) ripped his stuff from larpers like Proclus and Plotinus. Does that mean that those poor pagans got into heaven?

Haven't similar problems been repeated for quite a while?