What do you think?
Rate this book
Rereading Merleau-Ponty: Essays Beyond the Continental-Analytic Divide
Drawing from the recent surge of scholarship on the philosophy of Maurice Merleau-Ponty, this wide-ranging anthology demonstrates the breadth of interests encompassed by this remarkable philosopher's thought. More importantly, the plurality of perspectives here represented suggests that Merleau-Ponty's work has the potential to transcend the divide between "continental" and "analytic" (or Anglo-American) philosophy, two traditions that have seemed far more in conflict than communication. As the essays in this volume show, both sides of the divide have everything to gain from engaging the work of one of the twentieth century's most penetrating and provocative philosophers.
It is in this spirit of overcoming the polemics from both sides of the rift that editors Lawrence Hass and Dorothea Olkowski offer this collection on very contemporary topics. Divided into seven sections, sixteen articles discuss Merleau-Ponty's contributions to the study of intentionality, cognition and perception, philosophy of the natural and social sciences, ethics, political thought, ontology and genealogy, and philosophy of sexuality and love.
Through this multiplicity and interplay of different orientations, the editors hope to inspire not only a sensitive rereading of this most extraordinary philosopher but also an alternative model for philosophical thought and conversation beyond the divide.
It is in this spirit of overcoming the polemics from both sides of the rift that editors Lawrence Hass and Dorothea Olkowski offer this collection on very contemporary topics. Divided into seven sections, sixteen articles discuss Merleau-Ponty's contributions to the study of intentionality, cognition and perception, philosophy of the natural and social sciences, ethics, political thought, ontology and genealogy, and philosophy of sexuality and love.
Through this multiplicity and interplay of different orientations, the editors hope to inspire not only a sensitive rereading of this most extraordinary philosopher but also an alternative model for philosophical thought and conversation beyond the divide.
382 pages, Hardcover
First published August 1, 2000
20 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 15, 2023
if you like this review i now have website: www.michaelkamakana.com
110213: had read this, started this, a few years ago. got distracted, read various other authors and books on merleau-ponty. not, unfortunately, analytic philosophers aside from intros, contrasts, so do not know enough to critique how effective this is in introducing them, arguing about m-p. have heard he is an easier phenomenologist to follow for analytics, than others such as heidegger, but i would not know. have myself read much m-p and always could follow him better than logics text...
for those philosophers of that analytic style, this is interesting in slotting some ideas directly into argument, and perhaps from having read so much phenomenology- because I am ready for it- some very clear insights eg. denial, rejection, transcendence of solipsism. this is well played. because these are essays, some are very good, some less. as essays, these cover the entire range of topics to which m-p's thought can be applied. even when he never wrote specific works on politics, how this is an outgrowth of his ethics. his valuing, his arguing for, the mode of parliamentary democracy, ultimately because it is open-ended and foundational in promotion of interactive work, rather than foundation in way of deploying violence... this is great. political philosophers should get a lot out of this essay in particular...
110213: had read this, started this, a few years ago. got distracted, read various other authors and books on merleau-ponty. not, unfortunately, analytic philosophers aside from intros, contrasts, so do not know enough to critique how effective this is in introducing them, arguing about m-p. have heard he is an easier phenomenologist to follow for analytics, than others such as heidegger, but i would not know. have myself read much m-p and always could follow him better than logics text...
for those philosophers of that analytic style, this is interesting in slotting some ideas directly into argument, and perhaps from having read so much phenomenology- because I am ready for it- some very clear insights eg. denial, rejection, transcendence of solipsism. this is well played. because these are essays, some are very good, some less. as essays, these cover the entire range of topics to which m-p's thought can be applied. even when he never wrote specific works on politics, how this is an outgrowth of his ethics. his valuing, his arguing for, the mode of parliamentary democracy, ultimately because it is open-ended and foundational in promotion of interactive work, rather than foundation in way of deploying violence... this is great. political philosophers should get a lot out of this essay in particular...
Displaying 1 of 1 review