theMoMA wrote:Doug, only about 4/4 of what you label "continental" is actually continental in a useful sense of the word. Stuff like revivalist Neoplatonism and al-Ghazali is not continental in any sense other than that those people lived on the continent of Europe. "Continental" almost always means from the 19th century onward.
Believe me, I'm quite aware of the definitions of the terms I'm employing - note that I grouped these answers under the heading Clearly Postmodern/Continental/"World"
. So, uh, the label remains completely valid.
theMoMA wrote:Also, any definition that's lumping people like Nietzsche and Kant into "crazy Europeans that come up way too much" is just not useful. They are certainly in the continental tradition, but they are also foundational authors that should be coming up all the time.
I agree with you - and that's sure as hell not my definition! I hope I haven't given the impression that I believe Nietzsche and Kant ought to be relegated to the back of the philosophical bus - my lists were constructed to illustrate the considerable divergence between the representation of continental and analytic philosophy here, and what is the case in most philosophy departments in the U.S., so I just lumped everyone in their proper spot - I was not suggesting that everything grouped therein was unimportant or illegitimate. Certainly Nietzsche and Kant stand pretty tall, and their philosophically important works ought to come up left and right, I agree with you completely.
I'll answer Chris', Bruce's, and Marnold's criticisms a bit later; right now I'm aching for a nap.