For those
outside of the discipline, the distinction between analytic and continental
philosophy may seem trivial. After all, both traditions explore many of the
same philosophical problems and often examine the same primary texts. But while
the two each strive to clarify our knowledge of the world and our human nature,
they carry out these projects with the aid of different intellectual toolsets. In
applying these different tools to the same questions, analytic and continental
philosophers yield distinct types of knowledge. As we’ll learn, one
tradition tends to complement the other, but in some cases the subject matter
dictates a specific approach that favors either analytic or continental methods.
Continental Philosophy
The older
of the two traditions, continental philosophy incorporates the philosophical
subfields of metaphysics, ontology, epistemology, ethics and aesthetics. The
majority of its practitioners reside in continental Europe, where during the
late 18th century Immanuel Kant inaugurated the tradition that
became known as German Idealism. His Critique
of Pure Reason attempted to provide a solution to the skeptical empiricism
of David Hume and founded a school of epistemology that remains influential
today.
Kant and
his intellectual successor Hegel indulged in highly abstract metaphysical
speculation about the fundamental foundations of our knowledge of the world.
They attempted to construct all-encompassing systems that subsumed disparate
fields of philosophy under one meta-narrative, and their scope was
comprehensive in that they believed philosophy could function as the
explanatory cornerstone of human experience.
In the 19th
century, continental philosophers responded to the apparent disparity
between the advances of science and philosophy by rejecting the ambitious
extravagancies of Kant and Hegel. Thinkers such as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche
scoffed at the notion that philosophy could neatly embody the principles of every
field of learning and became suspicious of systematic attempts to formalize
human experience. Out of their influence emerged the existentialism of Sartre and
Camus in the early 20th century.
While the
priorities of continental philosophy changed over time, much of its style and basic
tools remained intact. Works by the early German Idealists and Kierkegaard
and Nietzsche share stylistic traits that distinguish them from analytic
philosophy. Both engage in prose that sacrifices formal rigor in an effort to convey
abstract meaning. Much of 19th and 20th century
continental philosophy reads more like literature than philosophy, at least by
analytic standards, and it's true that the continental thinkers are typically
more dynamic stylistically than analytic philosophers. For the continental
philosophers, language does not function as a rigid set of symbols conveying
strict denotations, but rather as a malleable instrument by which to explore
the boundaries of human comprehension.
Analytic Philosophy
Against this
perception, the analytic philosophers of the United Kingdom and the United
States attempt to limit their usage of language to demonstrably logical
statements about the world. Originating in the early 20th century
with works by Bertrand Russell, G.E. More and Ludwig Wittgenstein the analytic school of philosophy views the abstract indulgences of the continental tradition as
complicating our knowledge of things by introducing confusing language that is ultimately devoid of meaning.
Philosophers
should, they argue, limit themselves to logically verifiable statements of the
world that can provide reliable knowledge. By employing formal predicate logic,
analytic thinkers attempt to validate their achievements with a rigor rivaling
that of the natural sciences and mathematics. The prevalence of this
methodology reached a peak in logical positivism, whose practitioners insisted
that all philosophical statements must derive from either empirical observations or
analytic tautologies.
But logical
positivism, it turned out, couldn’t meet its own strict criteria for
justification and essentially died out by the late 20th century.
There was nothing logically necessary about its rules for valid statements, nor
did empirical observation provide warrant for believing those rules to be
fundamental. As a result, positivism has all but disappeared.
Other less
dogmatic forms of analytic philosophy are practiced throughout the
English-speaking world, and the tradition remains the dominant school of
philosophy in Western universities. Analytic philosophers employ formal logic
to reveal inconsistencies and errors in arguments that otherwise appear
plausible, and have contributed a great deal to our understanding of how
language often functions not to communicate objective facts, but to reinforce
our prejudices.
Application
To
illustrate the relative strengths of the analytic and continental approaches,
let’s consider a particular set of philosophical problems. The philosophy of
religion is concerned with the philosophical underpinnings of religious claims,
such as arguments for the existence of god, god’s attributes, the problem of
evil and the existence of the soul. Let’s briefly consider how the analytic and
continental traditions handle the question of god’s existence.
The
analytic school employs logic and linguistic analysis to determine whether the
claim “god exists” has any significant meaning. Does such a statement consider
the actual conditions of the universe, or does it represent an emotional
response to subjective experiences that cannot be verified empirically?
Christian philosophers in the analytic tradition such as Alvin Plantinga and
Richard Swinburne have used logic to argue that such statements are in fact
coherent claims about the universe and warrant our consideration.
Continental
philosophers will employ a different approach to the same question. Free from
the formal strictures of the analytic school, continental philosophers can indulge
in metaphysical speculation to explore the broader implications of the statement
“god exists.” How might god’s existence shape our theories of beauty and
justice? In questions where formal logic offers little insight, continental
approaches reveal stimulating avenues of inquiry. The orthodox theologian and
philosopher David Bentley Hart is a contemporary practitioner of continental
philosophy of religion.
This brief
overview of the two dominant schools of Western philosophy cannot cover the
many subtle distinctions or subfields within each tradition. They are broad
disciplines that incorporate diverse approaches, but our characterization
clarifies the fundamental differences between them and gives at least a general
indication of their respective merits.
