What Can Analytic and Continental Philosophers Learn From Each Other?

In this invited lecture and discussion at Virginia Commonwealth University, I discuss the question put to me - What can Analytic and Continental philosophers learn from each other? - and several other related topics, including the Analytic-Continental divide, the history and nature of both Analytic and Continental philosophy, and the importance of what has been left out of the picture, particularly historically-focused and -based approaches in philosophy.
Here are transcripts of the talk
/ what-can-analytic-and-...
/ what-can-analytic-and-...
/ what-can-analytic-and-...
/ what-can-analytic-and-...
1:09 - Introduction to the topics covered
4:53 - Preliminary Ideas about Analytic and Continental philosophy
7:44 - My own background and take on movements in philosophy
12:34 - Two analogies for the Analytic-Continental split
14:25 - Movements or approaches in philosophy left out of the picture
16:06 - How to characterize philosophy as an activity, discipline, and literature
21:52 - initial attempts to characterize Analytic and Continental philosophy
36:15 - Focusing in on Analytic philosophy
48:25 - Focusing in on Continental philosophy
59:58 - The Analytic--Continental divide and gaps within both movements
1:11:23 - Philosophers who have reached across the divide
1:13:11- What can Analytic and Continental philosophers learn from each other?
1:21:25 - What can they both learn from Historically-focused philosophers?
1:22:55 - The biggest obstacle, namely, Time
1:27:56 - General Q&A and discussion
Gregory Sadler is the president and founder of ReasonIO, a company that puts philosophy into practice - reasonio.wordp...
If you're interested in booking Dr. Sadler for a talk, lecture, discussion, or workshop, feel free to contact him at [e-mail]
#Philosophy #Analytic #Continental

[@ZiemniakZKosmosu]

''The most important, that we have a KZbin star among us.'' 0:17. I really like this statement:). If you can be KZbin star by speaking about philosophy on really high level, Internet cannot be completely hopeless place.

[@GregoryBSadler]

+ZiemniakZKosmosu Hahaha! I suggested that there's a distinction between "KZbin famous" and "actually famous"

[@TJTheEmperor]

It's great to find someone who's such a great expositor of philosophy who's also a fellow metalhead! Loving all your videos.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Hahaha! Yes indeed. Wish I had more time to listen to, and write about, metal!

[@kamilziemian995]

I know some metal music and I wonder what can be write about metal music, that is real important? Not easy question in my opinion.

[@GregoryBSadler]

@@ethansadberry6069 I do

[@seanericanderson3666]

We need more Philosophers on KZbin!

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, I do my part in trying to get them interested in it - and even coach some in how to do this kind of work. If you'd like to support the work I'm doing, here's my Patreon page - www.patreon.com/sadler

[@scod9746]

Excellent collective thought dialogue. Thank you for sharing the secrets of knowledge.

[@GregoryBSadler]

You're welcome

[@TheDavid2222]

I'm currently getting my masters in philosophy at SIU! It's an awesome coincide that Dr. Sadler got his PhD at SIU!

[@GregoryBSadler]

I gather the department is in much worse shape at present than it was when I was there

[@mementomori6736]

Dr. Greg, thanks for all the videos and making it so accessible. I used to follow the debate about this split for a while, it was all I could think for a while. Since the whole "science wars" of the 90's. Then I read a paper that if I remember correctly, was trying to bridge the divide . The solution, at first, seemed so simple, that I didn't take it seriously. But then I went through all the stages of grieving and accept that the argument was no only right but extremely strong and yet simple. I had to accept it. my question is 3 fold (if I may). O 1. Have you heard this "solution" to the divide. 2. Do you know whose idea was? or has written about it? 3. What do you think of it? So.. basically the argument says, that this divide and what bother us is the "truthness of method" like you mentioned one side is accused of being imperialistic with the use of mathematics, and the other one being relativist and solipsistic. and here's how this guy resolves. To have a nice and pretty sense of knowledge and truth and science, we have to accept and understand that we can only agree on epistimological approachs to knowledge, but then it follows that ontologically we cannot guarantee meaning. Does that makes sense... to ullustrate better I'll say something from Unamuno, God is for everyone, but everyone has it's own god. In a sense we can accept math and experimentation to be this "god" of knowledge, but what kind of "god" that is, and what it means, that's always going to be relativistic and hard to agree on and would keep changing over time. I hope it makes sense, I'm sure I butchered the argument like I did with the language. ESL here. Thanks.

[@GregoryBSadler]

I can't say I've heard that solution to the "divide", so I've got no answers to the other questions. Quite frankly, I'm not particularly bothered by the divide - I don't have a dog in their fight

[@mementomori6736]

Thank you Prof. This lecture remind me of that time, I remember Rorty arguing they were compatible. I honestly was mostly annoyed by the term "wars". but anyhow. Thank you again, and I really enjoy your lectures. :) (I apologize if my question sounded arrogant - it does to me now, that I read it. - I'm still learning the subtleties in the art of commenting in youtube. :) Much peace.

[@dsettleascii]

You should start a series on the philosophy of philosophy.

[@GregoryBSadler]

+dsettleascii Well. . . . I'm not sure what that would be . . . .

[@dsettleascii]

+Gregory B. Sadler Kind of like what Philosophy of Science deals with in terms of defining the profession, methods, what is it even for.

[@GregoryBSadler]

dsettleascii Well, philosophers have been doing "philosophy of philosophy" in the sense you're talking about for a long time. Never works out well, due to the very nature of philosophy itself. Every attempt to do what you're talking about -- and I've examined many of them -- ends up reflecting some particular understanding of philosophy, usually the one a person already sees as best.

[@adaff7522]

This is a field known as meta-philosophy

[@masked321321]

hes already talked about hegel!

[@judemiller]

12:35 I had two logic professors in university. One was a punk fan, the other a metalhead. Is this a common theme among academic philosophers?

[@GregoryBSadler]

Probably not

[@judemiller]

Lol. I've honestly wanted to see a lecture on this topic for a while now. Thanks for the upload, I appreciate all the content you release.

[@kamilziemian995]

1:37:45 This touch one of basics of philosophy as Socrates, Plato and Aristotle (I hope that statement is correct) understand it. How to live a good life? How is relation of philosophy to good life? Because wisdom, sophia, is much about being good and live good live, maybe when you have though family situation true philosophy is to abandon studies of works of philosophers and help your family?

[@damonkutzin262]

Would you be willing to share the list of 20 works?

[@GregoryBSadler]

+Damon K Sure - email me at [e-mail], and I'll send it to you

[@damonkutzin262]

+Gregory B. Sadler Done

[@rv706]

An analytic philosopher tackling Hegel is a bit like a H.I.P./philological orchestra conductor performing Bruckner. The result is not necessarily as bad as one would've believed some decades ago (think of Philippe Herreweghe performing Brahms, Bruckner, and Fauré....)

[@GregoryBSadler]

I'll have to take your word on that

[@rv706]

​@@GregoryBSadler: Hey, by the way, since it seems few minutes ago you were on yt, may I ask you an opinion..... Is the "continental" Italian philosopher Emanuele Severino (who recently passed away) known outside of Italy? Is his work considered seriously? I'm not a philosopher (in fact, I have a phd in math), but I got curious about this analytic-continental split after watching a mildly viral yt video mentioning him and lamenting the status of certain aspects of Italian humanities culture, for example a certain anti-science attitude and the cult of idealist philosophers of the fascist period such as Croce and Gentile. And by the way, what do non-Italians think of Croce and Gentile? Thanks :) [edit: I imagine, though, that most departments are probably "analytic" even in Italy nowadays]

[@GregoryBSadler]

@@rv706 Never heard of Severino.

[@rv706]

@@GregoryBSadler: This is probably telling (about Severino). Thanks

[@GregoryBSadler]

Well, I wouldn't infer too much. There are tens of thousands of philosophers out there who have published something. Nobody really knows more than a small portion of them

[@CheekyVimto08]

Would the Christian text you were thinking of be something by Pseudo Dionysus?

[@GregoryBSadler]

+CheekyVimto08 Pretty unlikely

[@germanndskartenfreak]

whats the country mentioned in 22:17 ?

[@germanndskartenfreak]

ok got it, its probably scandinavia

[@GregoryBSadler]

@@germanndskartenfreak Yep. Not a country but a region

[@mattgilbert7347]

Despite his being held up as the seminal analytic of the 20thC, I've often thought of Wittgenstein as something of a bridge between the two camps. Although he had not read much philosophy prior to his studying under Russell and the publication of the "Tractatus", and therefore any influences were bound to be minimal, much of what he had read was Continental, notably Schopenhauer. Personally, I prefer the later Wittgenstein of the "Philosophical Investigations" (the picture theory is wrong! lol), but I'm unsure to what extent this influenced contemporary Continentals. I may be wrong in my bridge metaphor, but I do know that LW regarded the "non-logical" sections of the "Tractatus" as critical to understanding his philosophy. These passages strike one with the force of a Nietzsche - or even Augustine. The "voice speaking from out of the whirlwind" as Bryan Magee once said. Nice work, as always.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Yes, Wittgenstein can be regarded as a kind of bridge figure - at least to certain streams of continental philosophy. It is a shame that his study of other thinkers was so selective

[@mattgilbert7347]

Gregory B. Sadler​ Which thinkers did you have in mind - Aristotle perhaps? He's also a "bridge" to the analytic's favourite relativist, W. V Quine. Although getting your average analytic to admit to WVO Quine's rather radical relativism can be quite a chore! :)

[@GregoryBSadler]

Matt Gilbert Certainly Aristotle, but dozens more

[@mattgilbert7347]

Gregory B. Sadler​ I suppose it follows from his "silence" doctrine, if you take my meaning Shall investigate. Thanks! I have Ray Monk's book but am so behind on my reading have yet to open it.

[@impcus2752]

is there a place we can find that reading list? is it apart of that pdf?

[@Itsunobaka]

Do you think the split is over reference? So, for example, that analytic philosophers tend to ask about to what concepts refer, while continental philosophers ask about how reference is structured? Great video.

[@GregoryBSadler]

+Itsunobaka Well, as I said in the video, I don't think there's any one substantive thing that really constitutes the divide. For any such suggested criterion, you can always find plenty of exceptions

[@kamilziemian995]

How long stand discussion, because to battery that was enough. But seems as lovely conversation :).

[@kamilziemian995]

1:24:30 Is this list of works avalible? I found handout but not that list. After this talk I think that is many things that can be learn from this two schools, also many that you should not learn, but I don't know where to start.

[@kamilziemian995]

@@wmradar Thank you. I only wonder, why all this works seems to be in continental school tradition?

[@kamilziemian995]

Thank you very much. No I need to find time and space in my life to study this topic more. 😅

[@alexvaught106]

the hair should've given it away but i'm not surprised you're a metalhead

[@GregoryBSadler]

Indeed - heavymetalphilosopher.blogspot.com/

[@bazooka2000]

What was the name mentioned at 39:05 ?

[@GregoryBSadler]

+Lsrdsk Wittgenstein

[@bazooka2000]

+Gregory B. Sadler That's what I suspected but I really couldn't make it out! Thanks Edit: Ohhh "the EARLY Wittgenstein", now I hear it

[@benquinney2]

Continental divide

[@GregoryBSadler]

Sort of, way back in the day. These days? Not quite so much

[@vintagewatchguy]

I'm not sure if this totally relates to analytic vs contintental and I'm not overly fond of postmodernism, but when considering the various ways of looking at philosophy specifically and our world in general, I wonder if "narratives" might be the best description of the various points of view. And instead of the question "which is closer to the truth", I can see where "usefulness" might come into play. Not denying objective truths or an objective reality... just trying to articulate our difficulties in regards to how to even talk about various philosophical topics.

[@GregoryBSadler]

I think one can certainly bring in attention to narratives and to usefulness without abandoning a commitment to objective truth. It just winds up with one's theory being more complex. . . you know, like reality

[@stephenblackwell7351]

Why were so many modern continental philosophers socialists or communists?

[@GregoryBSadler]

+Sam Barkley I don't know that's actually the case. I suppose if you look at the biographies of the ones who fit under those often ambiguous terms, you'd probably get some idea for those particular thinkers.

[@ZiemniakZKosmosu]

+Sam Barkley Do you read ,,The Opium of the Intellectuals'' of Raymond Aron? I think that he was concerned with precise that phenomena.

[@GregoryBSadler]

+ZiemniakZKosmosu He was concerned with some of the French intellectuals. Not "continental philosophers" as such. I suppose if you wanted another interesting figure, closer to our own time, criticizing French culture in a similar vein, you'd want to read J.-F. Revel's works

[@ZiemniakZKosmosu]

+Gregory B. Sadler You are right, I should be more specific about subject of Aron work. But I think that is still really good work on post war European intellectual life and Aron insides are also valuable outside his main realm of concern. For my perspective, maybe very bad perspective, postwar intellectuals and continental philosophers are to close to each other that such separation can't be very fruitful. Bertrand Russell also embrace some form of socialism, and many other outside continental school, so I think that bigger scope is step in right direction. I wrote this many time, but again it is worth of repeating. I form Poland and my perception of such things as continental philosophy and post war european intellectuals have different flavor because of that. I don't think that poles were really engaged in continental or analytic philosophy. We are generally bad philosophers. And to go back to main point, I look to Aron for some ideas that can be used here, because I don't find any good analysis of polish intellectuall life. But I still searching.

[@GregoryBSadler]

ZiemniakZKosmosu Well, as you know from the video, I don't see Analytic or Continental philosophers as the whole of the field. There's plenty of us in History of Philosophy as well, and that seems to be the case in many places in Europe (as I noted in the talk, "continental" is not the same thing as "european" in this case)

[@grunt12394]

You mentioned "philosophy as way of life". What I can't stand about academic philosophy is this over theoretical (Not that I'm against theory) is that it has very little to no practical application in people's lives. Which is what I love about ancient philosophy and religous Perrennialist thought it is practical and theoretically sound.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Philosophy as something practical and lived has continued down to the present, often within academic philosophy. Consider from the last century just a few thinkers: Blondel, Scheler, Arendt, Lacan, Macintyre.

[@grunt12394]

Macintyre and Blondel I could see what you mean. I know nothing about Scheler Arendt and I know Lacan somewhat . I guess I was trying to say that modern academic philosophy is so abstract and theoretical that it is hard to get concrete answers about meaning and metaphysical truths. Thinkers like Walter Benjamin and Zizek etc. Basically New Left thinkers which i suspect as a Rightist dominates the philosophy acedemy in terms of professors political views. Am I right about that last point. political views

[@GregoryBSadler]

Nate Nobile well, I'd say academic philosophers on the whole are center-left, not really so much radical left. I'd say a good bit of contemporary continental tends to see itself as radical left. Not really the case with much Analytic philosophy, though.

[@internetenjoyer1044]

i dont see how thats a problem (also sorry for the time lag between my comment and yours). Philosophy tries to solve a set of technical problems, with varying relation to "ordinary lives", like many subjects. you don't crticise, say, a physical chemistry paper for not being related to an ordinary peorson's life, so i don't see why you'd hold a different standard for philosophy.

[@Fafner888]

Theory has the potential to make people less stupid, and that's a very important practical goal for people's life.

[@dpavlovsky]

1:22:23 Jesuits take Aristotle pretty seriously.

[@GregoryBSadler]

Some do. Many don’t

[@gfsrow]

Analytic philosophy began (Cambridge), with Russell and Wittgenstein, by focusing primarily on logic and language; both of these philosophers insisted that natural science, including Darwin (or perhaps particularly Darwin), had no relevance for philosophy whatsoever. Similarly, Husserl also maintained this same observation, that natural science had no usefulness for philosophy. Hence both analytic and continental philosophy began the 20th century (and continued for much of the 20th century), with an incomplete tool box. By contrast, American pragmatism (especially John Dewey), embraced Darwin and natural science, which may help to explain why there was little interaction, if any, between them. Subsequently, natural science and evolution has become more and more relevant for philosophers in the Anglo-American community. Recently, several Anglo-American-Aistralian philosophers have, for example, been writing about aesthetics and beauty as having or as stemming from a naturalistic and/or evolutionary environment (plus there's Dewey again, with his "Art as Experience," which very much incorporated a Darwinian evolutionary aspect).

[@GregoryBSadler]

That's a very spotty history there. Not sure why you're posting it on my video.