La filosofía analítica del siglo XX

by Avrum Stroll

La filosofía analítica no es una doctrina específica, sino un conjunto de formas parecidas de enfocar los problemas. Mantiene vínculos estrechos con el cientismo, así como vínculos humanísticos con tos grandes pensadores y con los problemas filosóficos del pasado. Es más, no hay un único rasgo que caracterice las actividades de los filósofos analíticos. Sin amilanarse por estas dificultades, Avrum Stroll investiga el «aire de familia») existente entre ese amplísimo grupo de pensadores. Al hacerlo se enfrenta con el propósito mismo del filosofar. ¿Qué es la filosofía? ¿Cuáles son sus preguntas? ¿Qué tipo de información, aclaración y comprensión se supone que suministra la filosofía en el. caso de que no sea la que produce la ciencia natural? Mostrando una gran claridad, agilidad y profundidad filosófica, La filosofía analítica del siglo XX nos presenta un cuadro sinóptico de los principales desarrollos que se han producido durante el pasado siglo en lógica, filosofía del lenguaje, epistemología y metafísica. Para ello, el autor se centra en aquellos pensadores cuyas ideas han sido de mayor influencia: Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, Moore, Austin, Carnap, Quine, Ryle, Putnam, Kripke o Searle. El ámbito extraordinariamente complejo de la filosofía analítica aparece así menos abstracto, más como un espacio en el que actúan y compiten diversas personalidades, sus métodos y argumentos. De esta forma, Avrum Stroll presenta la filosofía analítica del siglo XX como un texto de fácil lectura a pesar de su complejidad analítica.

Genres: Philosophy

389 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[امیرمحمد حیدری · Rating 2 out of 5]

اورام استراول، استاد دانشگاه سن‌دیه‌گو در کالیفرنیا که در شاخه‌های معرفت‌شناسی، فلسفه‌ی زبان و فلسفه‌ی تحلیلی نیز پژوهش و تدریس می‌کند، در این اثر خود به بررسی بسیار دقیقی از فلسفه‌ی تحلیلی در قرن بیستم می‌پردازد. او با نقل قولی از لودویگ ویتگنشتاین در مقدمه، قدم بزرگی در راه خود برمی‌دارد:
{لودویگ ویتگنشتاین در (رساله) می‌نویسد: فلسفه یکی از علوم طبیعی نیست... . نتیجه‌ی فلسفه تعدادی «گزاره‌ی فلسفی» نیست، بلکه روشن کردن گزاره‌هاست.»} اگر امانوئل کانت فلسفه را یک پله به عقب برگرداند، پس فیلسوفان تحیلی این علم را ده‌ها پله تقلیل دادند. راسل و ویتگنشتاین که از مهم‌ترین فلیسوفان تحلیلی به‌شمار می‌روند، با پایین‌آوردن سطح بررسی فلسفه به (گزاره‌ها) و بررسی صدق و کذب‌شان یا اصلاً صلاحیت‌شان برای استقلال به‌عنوان یک گزاره، تحول عظیمی ایجاد کردند. به‌طور مثال، ویتگنشتاین بسیاری از مسائل انتزاعی فلسفه را نه مسئله، بلکه مهمل خطاب کرده و بر این باور است که آن‌ها حل‌نشدنی‌اند و باید منحل شوند. همچنین، آن‌ها با این باور که ریاضی یکی از زبان‌های منطق است، نشانه‌گذاری را بهترین راه ارتباطی میان گزاره‌های فلسفی و زبان تلقی کردند. این اثر، فصل‌های متعددی برای شناخت کلیاتی از ابعاد مختلف فلسفه تحلیلی را، در کنار فصولی برای پرداختن به یک فیلسوف خاص در دستور کار قرار می‌دهد. به‌طور مثال، فصولی برای: برتراند راسل، لودویگ ویتگنشتاین، رودالف کارناپ، مور، رایل، ج.ل.آستن، و.و.کواین و... اختصاص داده شده که شامل زندگینامه‌ای مختصر و مرتبط به زندگی فلسفی‌شان است، مهم‌ترین آراء فلسفی و نقد و بررسی‌شان می‌شود.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Avrum Stroll has grouped together and shown the similarities of the last century or so of major (mostly) British and American analytic philosophers, from Gottlob Frege though the early 20th century greats at Cambridge (Moore, Russell, Wittgenstein), to the postwar greats at Oxford and Americans like Quine and Kripke. He gives biographic information anecdotally, and seeks to explain each philosopher's work and ideas and the philosophical context they existed in. His major metaphor for the Analytic tradition is the 'Solera system', taken from the bottling of Sherry - where the best old sherries are topped off with more recent vintages, and thus their quality is preserved. In philosophy, despite the obvious irrelevance of Aristotle or other ancients when discussing topics which have since been subsumed by the natural sciences, the philosophic tradition is preserved because new philosophers reinvigorate older philosophers, and ancient insights and paradoxes trouble generation after generation. Wittgenstein, after years of formal logic, wrote on Augustine's ideas on time. Russell similarly reinvigorated Frege, and Quine followed in bringing Frege back into prominence. Is philosophy doomed, as Hilary Putnam seems to believe? Yes, in the areas where its inquiries stray into science. But in logic, metaphysics, and especially through Wittgenstein's later methods, which focus philosophers to think in non-scientific ways about non-scientific topics, philosophy will remain. I certainly hope the Analytic tradition has more influence than the idealist continental philosophers with their obscurantist hermenuetic accretions on the foundational idealist Hegel and Marx. This book convinced me to read more G.E. Moore, but that Karnap is probably not really worth it for all his relentless categorization.

p.s. typo on page 119, line 9 of the hardcover - "freeest".

[Philipp Schwind · Rating 2 out of 5]

Uneven in quality; some chapters, such as the one on Quine, are alright but most others are superficial and spend way to much space on biographical details that are without philosophical importance (was Wittgenstein really gay? was he even promiscuous, or did he only have a few lovers?). Repeatedly, Stroll briefly mentions an objection to a view without explaining it, and then remarks that argument in question is to complicated for the present book and moves on.

Although the title promises an evenhanded overview over analytic philosophy in the 20th century, it completely ignores practical philosophy; there is no single mention of Rawls, Williams, Hare or alike.

Stroll manages to make mistakes in almost all of his german quotes.

[José Monico · Rating 4 out of 5]

The overview that this book undertook is perfect for someone that has yet to decide if they would like to take a crack at the first-hand material (and its opaqueness) of this branch of philosophy. Some aspects were given greater emphasize (Quine, Wittgenstein). Others were abrupt (Austin, Moore, Hume). But overall, it was a very informative read; but I would perhaps recommend something even a bit more informal for those first-timers. As analytic philosophy surrounds its analysis on language and modal logic, which can be quite a daunting task to understand.

But like many forms of this type of book, it primarily explores its subject-matter through less quantifiable forms. I definitely can understand the reason, as jargon implies explaining that jargon. But oftentimes the non-technical explanations made things more obscure than they needed to be.

[Kerr · Rating 5 out of 5]

I asked my Professor friend Josh about this subject and this was the book he recommended and it was EXACTLY the introduction to Analytic philosophy that , I, as a non-academic, also lacking in even basic maths ability was looking for. With Mathematics kept to the barest minimum I was able to grasp the premise of the arguments written in ordinary non-technical language and I'm now intrigued by several philosophers written about here and wish to read more of them which I wasn't keen on previously due to my lack of (and antipathy) mathematical ability as I preferred to stick to theory and political philosophy.

Where this leads me I'm not sure but as the last line of the book says "We shall have to wait and see what the future brings."

[Jack Rosetti · Rating 3 out of 5]

I don't normally write reviews, but since there are so few available, I thought it might benefit posterity. This book benefits from Stroll's tone, which is never patronizing nor inscrutable. He treats you like a competent person, which sets the stage for how much I enjoyed his writing. When reading secondary sources like his, one risks the "dumbing down" effect, whereby the author treats you like you could only understand a small part of the argument, and only if the argument is dryly spelled out with multiple examples. Stroll avoids this and instead opts to speak to us as if we have never heard of, say, JL Austin, but are nonetheless competent enough to understand what a speech-act is or why it's important.
Not only is he well-read, but Stroll contributes his own thoughts to these philosophers, instead of trying to remain "objective." I think this greatly benefits the book, because it adds a dimension of criticality/skepticism to titans like Wittgenstein and Quine -- and make no mistake, he does not always agree with Quine. I loath when historians of philosophy don't reveal which philosophers they admire and agree with. I think the excuse is always cheap, too: "I am just trying to be an objective observer of this person and their impact." I always see this as a fool's errand, because there will always be a break from "objectivity." Moreover, philosophy is about reading and interpreting, hardly an objective task. To be "objective" is to cast yourself as a scientist of sorts. Stroll disavows Scientism -- he delivers an excellent critique of Quine's conception thereof -- and greatly benefits from it. He realizes that philosophy cannot be conducted outside subjective interpretations of philosophers and texts.
So, why three stars? Stroll limits his discussion to a handful of philosophers. Great philosophers, of course, but the absence of Pragmatists like Davidson and Brandom really left a bitter taste in my mouth. He even excludes people like Strawson, Grice, Searle and Anscomb. I get that writing a book has its limits, but these thinkers each deserve, in my opinion, more treatment than he provided.

[A. B. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ah, the introduction to analytic philosophy I've been searching for so long! Gives a good overview of the historical development of the main areas of thought; until Quine.