What Is Analytic Philosophy?
What Is Analytic Philosophy?
复制标题
什么是分析哲学？
DOI：
10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199238842.013.0039
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. Beaney
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Beaney
1.开篇是一个方法论的评论：在试图回答什么是分析哲学的问题时？我将遵循两个方法论原则。(1)第一个是由彼得·哈克提出的，内容是：̳任何对分析哲学‖的描述，不包括摩尔、罗素和后来的维特根斯坦，以及战后分析哲学的领军人物[对我们来说，这些是约翰·威斯登、赖尔、奥斯汀、斯特劳森和达米特]，肯定必须拒绝。(Hacker 1996a，第247页)分析哲学的正确定义必须与其公认的奠基人的哲学相一致。(2)过去在哲学史上大量代表的̳分析哲学的任何特征也必须被拒绝。可以肯定的是，摩尔、罗素和维特根斯坦，以及后来的莱尔、奥斯汀和他们的朋友，都在做一种他们有意识地理解为新的哲学类型--这是本质上的新哲学。问题只是，这种新鲜感很难识别和定义。
1. OPENING At the onset, a Methodological Remark: In trying to answer the question What is analytic philosophy? I shall follow two methodological principles. (1) The first was suggested by Peter Hacker and reads: ̳Any characterisation of ―analytic philosophy‖ which excludes Moore, Russell and the later Wittgenstein, as well as the leading figures of post-War analytic philosophy [for us these are John Wisdom, Ryle, Austin, Strawson and Dummett], must surely be rejected.‘ (Hacker 1996a, p. 247) The correct definition of analytic philosophy must cohere with the philosophy of its generally recognized founding fathers. (2) Any characterisation of ̳analytic philosophy‘ which was massively represented in the history of philosophy in the past, must be rejected too. To be sure, Moore, Russell and Wittgenstein, and later also Ryle, Austin and their friends, were doing a type of philosophy which they consciously understood as new—it was intrinsically New Philosophy. The problem was only that this newness was difficult to identify and define.