Contextualist vs. Analytic History of Philosophy

Think 8 (22):1-5 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper uses analogies between Socratic and Wittgenseinian dialogues to argue that analytic philosophy of history should not be abandoned. In their responses to my paper ‘In Defence of Four Socratic Doctrines’ James Warren and John Shand raised a number of important methodological objections, relating to the study of the history of philosophy. I here respond by questioning the supremacy of contextualist history of philosophy over the so-called ‘analytic’ approach. I conclude that the history of ideas had better leave space for both approaches, and that it is a mistake to think of each as being in competition with the other.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,102

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-17

Downloads
107 (#155,013)

6 months
2 (#785,137)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Constantine Sandis
University of Hertfordshire

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references