Non-Analytic Philosophy Departments?

<p>I am currently researching a wide variety of colleges and universities, especially in relation to their philosophy departments. To my disappointment, however, the large majority of undergraduate institutions which attract me are considered to be in the “analytic” tradition of philosophy.</p>

<p>Now, I am going to diverge and explain a few of the reasons I am uncomfortable with the analytic tradition. Skip over if desired: </p>

<hr>

<p>Now, do not misunderstand, I hold a great respect and keen interest in the practice of analytic philosophy. At the same time, I view it as too narrow and too close-minded to be considered representative of the whole of philosophy. Metaphysics, ethics, and value theory (in its broadest sense) are perhaps the fields of philosophy that I am most interested in studying, and yet these are often underemphasized or even ignored in analytic philosophy. </p>

<p>My primary gripe with analytic philosophy is its limited scope. Rather than allow rationality to fully explore the greatest and most fundamental questions of humanity, it chisels away all things broad or untenable, without exploring the propositions fully. Are not the principle of empiricism, the authority of science, and the value of logic subject to the consideration of philosophy as well? Since when has philosophy, which seeks to strip bear the presuppositions and assumptions of mankind, been inextricably tied to its own presuppositions? </p>

<p>Beyond this, I take a strong interest in metaphilosophy – the philosophy of philosophy. I view the subject matters of philosophy, the practice, and even the study of its practice as continuous. I regard the purpose for philosophical study as equal in importance to the specific questions it explores. Constant re-evaluation is healthy, and integration of philosophical disciplines paramount. I view philosophy as, in ways, synoptic and uncaged. Suppressions of questions, or the curtailment of reason, I view as unforeseen but unavoidable byproducts of the analytic tradition.</p>

<p>At the same time, I believe thorough analysis has its role, where it is needed. While epistemology hinges on broader metaphysical questions, such as the role of truth and knowledge and its greater context in relation to the mind, the external world, and so forth, in the direct evaluation of the veracity of an argument or the logic behind a statement, analytic methods are essential. While one must never withhold the methods themselves from scrutiny, the rigorous approaches of analytic philosophy are revolutionary and valuable in the fields of epistemology, philosophy of science, philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of language and so forth. I do not doubt the assertions of analytic philosophy, necessarily, so much as adherents’ common refusal to trace their logic beyond the standards they abide by (formal logic, the authority of science…) or to address questions they deem subjective (some of ethics, metaphysics, aesthetics). Their over-obsession with being right might blind them to the fact that philosophy, above all, should satisfy a purpose, and not merely be a practice. Reason, while associated with truth, cannot be melded with it, such that reason is tied only to the pursuit of truth (which, if the case, would mean the end, “truth”, would be outside reason itself, despite being a concept local to the human mind). </p>

<p>Now, if you did care to read this, I admire your persistence! Of course, this is not some type of thesis or formal argument. I have quickly typed this up to reflect thoughts circling in my head at this moment in time. More would pop up after further pondering, and I am sure that there are several loopholes in my above reasonings. I do not have the time, nor the interest, to perfect this as though I were using it as a thesis. Therefore, in your answers, please do not argue with my above assertions or thoughts, but rather with my primary questions, which will follow.</p>

<hr>

<p>My question, then, is as follows: What philosophy departments, among North American undergraduate institutions, are most considered “non-analytic”, or at least appear open to views that differ from the majority of analytic philosophers? Or, even if the schools consider themselves more in line with the analytic tradition, which offer the most extensive course lists – including names such as Hegel and Sartre and in depth studies of fields such as metaphysics, ethics, value theory (in its broadest sense), and so forth, which are usually not as central in analytic philosophy?</p>

<p>I am sure there are multiple institutions which satisfy the above stipulations. If so, I would like listed the schools considered highest in quality and most academically-minded, in line with the most highly-selective institutions in North America. Personal experience or advice that strays slightly from the stated question would also be appreciated.</p>

<p>Thank you to all answerers, in advance!</p>

<p>I am not sure what “analytical philosophy” means to you, since analytical philosophers have concerned themselves with ethics and metaphysics since the second half of the last century. Are you thinking of early analytical philosophy, or analytic philosophy as opposed to continental philosophy?</p>

<p>Be that as it may, you may be interested in graduate philosophy rankings by specialty. They will tell you which departments do the sort of philosophy you are looking for:</p>

<p>[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2009 :: Breakdown of Programs by Specialties](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown.asp)</p>

<p>While I have been researching philosophy departments as a whole for months, the terms “continental” and “analytic” are relatively new to me, and so perhaps I misused the label “analytic”. I did base some of my comments on early analytic philosophy (think Bertrand Russell); perhaps I falsely assumed that current analytic philosophy generally reflected his, as well as other early analytic philosophers’, ideas. I have also read a few articles concerning the split between “analytic” and “continental” philosophy. More neutral departments in relation to these two traditions would appeal to me, from what I know.</p>

<p>But thanks for the link. That will be helpful.</p>

<p>[YouTube</a> - ‪But I want to study philosophy.‬‏](<a href=“But I want to study philosophy. - YouTube”>But I want to study philosophy. - YouTube)</p>

<p>Seriously, consider, Calvin College, one of the top undergrad depts.
[Calvin</a> College - Philosophy from a Christian Perspective](<a href=“http://www.calvin.edu/academic/philosophy/]Calvin”>Department Of Philosophy - Academics | Calvin University)</p>

<p>Skip philosophy all together if you are interested in pursuing advanced studies in humanities! Literature department usually has a decent collection of specialists in literary theory, that is: continental philosophy with a focus on language & rhetorics. </p>

<p>But the usual continental leaning philosophy programs include Boston College, St.John, and Rutgers. If you are serious about it, you should also consider taking French and German while in college. Fluency in either one of those languages will help you a whole lot.</p>

<p>[A</a> Ranking of U.S. Departments in Continental Philosophy](<a href=“http://mypage.siu.edu/hartmajr/report/report.html#rank]A”>http://mypage.siu.edu/hartmajr/report/report.html#rank)</p>

<p>Also, a lot of the philosophers, who are known for continental philosophy, can be usually studied in literature department accross schools who might only offer analytical department. You may find a class on neitzche in the german department, kierkegaard in the Scandinavian deparment, eastern philosophers in japanese and chinese departments. A major like world literature or comparative literature, or even English(in translation) literature, can provide you access to study great thinkers who aren’t usually covered in analytic philosophy departments. If you’re dead set on philosophy, some of those programs may even give you course credit for electives for the major.</p>

<p>Thanks for all of the great answers!</p>

<p>@ThisCouldBeHeavn Hilarious and true!</p>

<p>@zapfino Interesting that you mention Calvin – I have several friends that go there, in addition to my history teacher being an alumnus of Calvin. I’ll look into it.</p>

<p>@pharmakeus01 I have considered that prospect, but I think a minor in literature or use of electives towards this end are more in line with my goals. But who knows, I have plenty of time to decide. Thanks for the language suggestions, I’ll keep that in mind.</p>

<p>@liek0806 Great source and helpful advice! My only worry would be that I would compartmentalize my learning into literary and philosophical, instead of seeing it as a cohesive whole. But studying philosophy with the addition of some classes in literature is a interesting idea.</p>

<p>Does anyone have an opinion on the undergraduate philosophy department at Haverford? I realize you can take classes from both Bryn Mawr and Haverford if you attend… Is it a strong program? Does it lean towards analytic or continental philosophy, from what you know? From what I can gather it appears neutral or even slightly continental in nature.</p>

<p>What I’ve heard is that Vanderbilt, Georgetown, Penn State, Stony Brook, and Duquesne are all departments that are very continental leaning. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Uh, Rutgers? Sorry but Rutgers has to be one of the most analytic philosophy departments in the country. There basically isn’t anyone on their philosophy faculty that does anything remotely continental, and it’s a huge department.</p>

<p>I understand your plight. I am having the same issues as well. There is more to what many philosophers have said in the past, that academic philosophy tends to miss.</p>