Bergson, apostle of reactionary irrationalism
A draft from March 5, 2009. I don’t recall what I planned to write, but here are the references: Nizan, Paul. “The End of a Philosophic Parry: Bergsonism,” Les Revues, 1929, reprinted in Paul Nizan, Intellectuel Communiste Maspero (Paris, 1967). Nizan exposes Bergson’s empty pseudoconcreteness, which reminds me of Adorno’s later evisceration of Heidegger. My [...]
The Institution of Philosophy (4)
Cohen, Avner; Dascal, Marcelo; eds. The Institution of Philosophy: A Discipline in Crisis? La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989. Joseph Margolis, “Radical Philosophy and Radical History,” pp. 249-270. Wittgenstein, Heidegger, and Derrida may have wanted to put an end to traditional philosophy, but at most they provided self-corrective measures, not the therapies they though they [...]
The Institution of Philosophy (3)
Cohen, Avner; Dascal, Marcelo; eds. The Institution of Philosophy: A Discipline in Crisis? La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989. Hilary Putnam, “Why Is a Philosopher?”, pp. 61-75. Putnam expresses his distemper with positivism and postmodernism, discusses the problem of language and the beloved philosopher’s problem of the brain-in-a-vat, and proposes his philosophy of internal realism. [...]
The Institution of Philosophy (2)
Cohen, Avner; Dascal, Marcelo; eds. The Institution of Philosophy: A Discipline in Crisis? La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989. Much of this book is a portrait of bankruptcy, permeated by the stench of Richard Rorty. Here are a few stool specimens. Hector-Neri Castaneda, “Philosophy as a Science and as a Worldview,” pp. 35-60. Castaneda is [...]
The Institution of Philosophy (1)
Cohen, Avner; Dascal, Marcelo; eds. The Institution of Philosophy: A Discipline in Crisis? La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1989. When I first surveyed this anthology four years ago, the name Marcelo Dascal, whose work is currently under review, was unknown to me. My assessment of this book was . . . er . . . [...]
Dascal on disputation & the analytical-continental divide
Dascal, Marcello. How rational can a polemic across the analytic-continental ‘divide’ be?, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9(3): 313-339, 2001. In order to specify controversy’s position within the large family of polemical dialogues, I propose to distinguish between three members of the subfamily to which controversies belong. I will call them ‘discussion’, ‘dispute’, and ‘controversy’. [...]