I would love to see about a 5-page overview in which analytic philosophy is contrasted with Continental philosophy (is it still called that?), and where exactly logical positivism fits into that. Or maybe a tree diagram or flow chart would be better. Williamson is a well-qualified academic writing for his peers, I understand that. But in addition to making philosophy more practical, it would help if there were brief introductions that were accessible to the lay person.
The IEP’s entry on metaphilosophy does not explicitly compare or contrast analytic and continental philosophy, but is a start: https://iep.utm.edu/con-meta/.
> where exactly logical positivism fits into that
Logical positivism is fairly straightforwardly in the analytic tradition.
> accessible to the lay person
Williamson’s more technical work (e.g., /Vagueness/) is not terribly accessible, but this book review is fairly accessible, in the same way as, e.g., a moderately well-read philosopher can read lengthy book reviews in history journals.
3 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 19.0 ms ] threadThe IEP’s entry on metaphilosophy does not explicitly compare or contrast analytic and continental philosophy, but is a start: https://iep.utm.edu/con-meta/.
> where exactly logical positivism fits into that
Logical positivism is fairly straightforwardly in the analytic tradition.
> accessible to the lay person
Williamson’s more technical work (e.g., /Vagueness/) is not terribly accessible, but this book review is fairly accessible, in the same way as, e.g., a moderately well-read philosopher can read lengthy book reviews in history journals.