Ancient Greek philosophers - analytic or continental?

Question

Okay, I'm not understanding why can't the ancient Greek philosophers can't be classified as analytic or continental philosophers since analytic and continental philosophy merely differ in their style of approach. Analytic philosophy emphasizes the clarity of thought and mathematical rigor and the precise use of language, while continental philosophy is less analytical and poetic in its writing.

1.) So what style in the ancient Greek philosophers follow? (I've asked this question a few times but nobody is able to give me an answer). I know that continental philosophy began in the 19th and 20th century, but if it's only a matter of style, why can't the ancient Greek philosophers be categorized into one of them?
2.) It has been said that continental philosophy is more interested in the human condition. However, doesn't the human condition also propel analytic philosophers to engage in philosophy?

Answer 1

Analytic and Continental philosophy do have different styles, but it is not just about style. The two traditions refer to specific Philosophers who lived around the same time, in the same place, with the same influences, dealt with the same things (WWII being central to both), and engaged in discussion together.



1) Ancient Greek Philosophy is completely dominated by Plato/Socrates and Aristotle. Most of what we know of other Greek Philosophers, the Pre-Socratic Cosmologists, is in fact from Plato and Aristotle's writings. Not many other books have survived. Regarding style, Plato's works are primarily "dialectic" discussions of approaches to Truths and Virtues. Aristotle's works are his Student's notes about Aristotle's systematic classification of Medical, Scientific, and Philosophical matters. In a way, Aristotle's style is similar to the Analytic.



2) Sure... all philosophy is about the human condition. Continental writings tend to focus on descriptions of Human consciousness.



Here is a couple of good examples. These are both important papers and very emblematic of their traditions.



"Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?" by E. L. Gettier (Analytic)

http://www.ditext.com/gettier/gettier.html

This is a very influential paper. The writer, Gettier, builds on Aristotle. He reduces his argument to clear Symbol Logic notation. He uses simple, short, examples. It's only two pages.



"Is Ontology Fundamental?” by Emmanuel Levinas (Continental)

http://books.google.ca/books?id=dmHH1Xie8Q0C&lpg=PA1&ots=gWpxJxS6TS&dq=%22Is%20Ontology%20Fundamental%3F%22&pg=PA2#v=onepage&q=%22Is%20Ontology%20Fundamental?%22&f=false

This early Levinas essay describes his diversion from Heidegger's ontology in favour of a focus on Ethics. At points, he contrasts his ideas with other Continental philosophers and Plato a little. His ideas of being and knowledge don't fit in Symbolic Logic notation, he describes his concepts more abstractly, using words like self, other, the mind, the face, etc.

Answer 2

1. You want to know what style they used, and why they can't have a different name. They already have a name and a style. They and it are called Ancient. They were called that before analytic philosophy rolled in. Furthermore, analytic came out of logical positivism. why would we drop a perfectly suitable name for the Ancients, and call them analytic when they had noting to do with logical positivism? Additionally, the ancients were premodern. The advent of modernism is a major division, philosophically set into motion with Descartes. And before that was a long period called the Medieval. The Ancients come nowhere close. The arguments all shifted. Too much went on between they an the post modern and especially the contemporary. There was a whole paradigm shift. Why don't we call an abacus a computer? An abacus computes. Too long ago. Ancient. Why don't we call the fastest and smallest car from the 30's a sports car? Because they didn't have sports cars. If the Ancient Egyptians had templates upon which they would put paint and press the templates against walls why wouldn't we call them printing presses? Because there were no printing presses yet. All that lead up to what we call printing presses hadn't even happened yet. It is a matter of history and development. It is a whole picture over time. Periods have come and gone. We have names for them, and identify them by their sets of characteristics that cohere with one another. It is how it works. With respect to philosophy, understanding that is part of learning philosophy.



2. analytic is a matter of method. and no the analytic method is not applied much to human condition. Nor is analytic propelled by concern over human condition. Condition being the operative word. Why not? because somebody else does that. The continentalists. Why else? It is too speculative, which analytic philosophy veers from. It's like asking why can't psychology be considered a hard science? because it is too much speculation, and unfalsifiable claims, etc.. Why? because it deals with humans and their condition.



Largely, your answers were in your questions. It comes down to classifications. just learn the names, accept the reasons, and consider that people already gave it due thought to come up with what works over all, considering inevitable gray areas. Your questions are good ones.



Best,

TQRP

Answer 3

Continental philosophy is not a style it's a tradition. Continental being largely European while Analytic is more Anglo-Saxon. You can't separate the tradition from the thinkers that define it. Greek and Roman philosophy is just that, philosophers active in the classical period. Their thought cannot be reduced or categorized according to modern philosophy. Greco-Roman philosophy has influenced both the continental and analytic traditions.



Response: Broadly, there is no one style or method. Unless you consider reason and logic to be a style. You might be able to distinguish them by schools of thought, however. The pre-Socratics were concerned with natural philosophy, while the Socratic/Platonic tradition is concerned with moral or political philosophy. Aristotle being concerned with both moral/political and natural philosophy. The Cynics, Stoics, and Epicureans are similar. There is less emphasis on mythology and tradition and more on reason and the natural world. I would say the majority of classical thought is eudaimonic; seeking the good life and thus highly ethical in nature. These are all precursors to modern science and philosophy. But you won't really find a concern over language and existence as you do in analytic and continental philosophy. Some of the questions might be the same, but the methods and style are not comparable. My opinion, of course.

Answer 4

Thales, mentioned each thing is Water Parmenides, "the way" Monism Anaximenes, Boundless Empedocles, 4 factors, plus the 5th element Heraclitus, hearth Lucretius, "the character of the Universe" Atomism Epictitus Plato & Socrates, "Symposium", "The Republic" Aristotle, The Poetics Readings,

Answer 5

how will this help you in life...crap..i remember why i didnt go to college.....uh and NO you dont need college to be successful.