 "Philosophy"
Agostino di Duccio 1456 |
Razors, Volcanoes, and Harlequins: Branches of the philosophical family |
 "Minerva
Protects Pax from Mars" Rubens, 1629-30 |
Scholars in philosophy can choose from a wide variety of fields and of thinkers as their primary areas of research. Philosophy is the name of a big family, so big that some of its members can hardly communicate with each other. Although there are untold ways to categorize all the cousins and distant relatives, I prefer a three-fold division.
(1) Those who are usually quick of mind, adept at puzzles, comfortable in abstractions, and fond of mathematical notation. Let's call these folks the "razors". They are razor sharp, practice rigorous logical argumentation, always favor the "hard" over the "soft", love to disambiguate, and prefer the rarified air of meta-analysis over the messiness of ordinary life. Much of professionalized philosophy in the United States, certainly that associated with the "top" universities, falls into the "razor" category. A more common name for this type of philosophizing is "analytic philosophy." For a quick overview and a ranking of these schools (a ranking best used only by those already within the analytical camp) check out the philosophical gourmet report.
(2) There are also philosophers who explode with insights about the deepest and widest issues, often phrased in terms of "being". These folks are fond of profundities and of world-historical sweeping statements. Logical rigor does not figure prominently in their articulations. Their concern is to formulate a comprehensive vision of existence within which humans can situate themselves meaningfully. For this purpose neologisms are often introduced and, in general, the language of presentation is difficult if not downright obfuscatory. Sartre, Heidegger, possibly Nietzsche, Spinoza, and Plotinus, fall into the "volcano" category.
Both the "razors" and the "volcanoes" tend to draw on their own resources of clear thinking and intuitiveness for developing philosophical positions.
(3) The "harlequins", by contrast, tend to favor patchwork constructions which draw on various testimonials, those of the sciences, poetry, the visual arts, the social sciences, history, and literature. They tend to envision their task as framing a network of interconnected ideas, consistent with the best in the testimonies of the sciences, the arts and the humanities, a set of ideas which offers a comprehensive understanding that can guide individual lives and public policy. Since the "razors" pay little attention to literature, and the "volcanoes" seem comfortable developing philosophies which make no attempt to integrate scientific discoveries, the "harlequins" offer an alternative to both. Some of the more prominent harlequins in the past have been Aristotle and Leibnitz. In the twentieth century, Bergson, Whitehead, James and Dewey fall into the "harlequin" mold.
From my descriptions of "razors", "volcanoes", and "harlequins" you can probably surmise my predilection for the harlequins. My main interest for some years has been American Pragmatism, especially the thought of John Dewey. Recently, my interest has turned to a French philosopher who appreciates both sciences and literature, Michel Serres. Besides research in Dewey and Serres, my work has moved in the direction of a guilty pleasure, the philosophy of food.