→ RitsuN:感謝配合 m(_ _)m 12/20 16:08
※ 編輯: A1Yoshi 來自: 82.11.187.202 (12/20 16:10)
推 RAYBO:其實本來就不該將德希達視為歐陸哲學的樣板人物呀...他本身 12/20 18:32
→ RAYBO:在歐陸也是爭議性的~~印象中他好像還是在美國紅回歐洲的~ 12/20 18:33
看推文吵起來還挺有趣的。我朋友給了我一個連結，我略讀一下發現
和我最近這幾篇文講的地方交集很多。不過我之前沒看過這一篇，連
結如下，給大家參考之：
http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/analytic.asp
其中我引一段，做為回應我的「主流說」的補充：
Although it appears to be a widespread view in the humanities that
"analytic" philosophy is "dead" or "dying," the professional
situation of analytic philosophy simply does not bear this out. All
the Ivy League universities, all the leading state research universities,
all the University of California campuses, most of the top liberal
arts colleges, most of the flagship campuses of the second-tier state
research universities boast philosophy departments that overwhelmingly
self-identify as "analytic": it is hard to imagine a "movement" that
is more academically and professionally entrenched than analytic
philosophy.
順道一提，這段短短文字其實也（部分）呈現了我所謂的簡單直接清
楚：瞧他都用多簡單的英文字啊！大概除了"entrench"可能算是超過
台灣高中水準的單字以外，要看這一段根本不需要查字典！：D
還有一件事。其實我前面講的大師德西達....我看了幾篇文好像壓根
沒人把他分在歐陸哲學家。。。這件事也很有趣。
他絕對不是分析哲學家。而他又不屬於歐陸 -> 所以他根本不是哲學
家，哈哈哈～～
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 82.11.187.202
※ 編輯: A1Yoshi 來自: 82.11.187.202 (12/20 16:06)