TY  - JOUR
T1  - Analitik Felsefe - Kıta Felsefesi Ayrışmasının Tarihsel Dayanakları
TT  - The Historical Foundations of the Analytical - Continental Philosophy Divide
AU  - Karaca, Çağlar
PY  - 2025
DA  - September
Y2  - 2025
DO  - 10.20981/kaygi.1610494
JF  - Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi
JO  - Kaygı
PB  - Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi
WT  - DergiPark
SN  - 2645-8950
SP  - 949
EP  - 975
VL  - 24
IS  - 2
LA  - tr
AB  - Analitik felsefe ile kıta felsefesi arasındaki ayrışma, 20. yüzyılda ortaya çıkmış ve felsefe tarihinedamgasını vurmuştur. Ayrışmanın Amerikan üniversitelerinde “resmiyet” kazanması ve ardındanküresel ölçekte yaygınlaşması ile birlikte, çeşitli felsefe akımları arasındaki fay hatları daderinleşmiştir. Bu makalede, söz konusu ayrışmanın ne ölçüde felsefî savlara dayandığısorgulanmakta; ayrışmanın yer yer düşünce tarihindeki girift ilişkilenmeleri perdelediği ve budurumun anakronik yorumlarla paralel bir gelişim sergilediği öne sürülmektedir. Bu savıdesteklemek üzere, ayrışmada belirleyici olan fikrî akımlar ve ideolojik kamplaşmalar ile tümbunlara bağlı olarak akademide gerçekleşen kırılmalar ele alınacaktır. Makalenin ilk bölümündefelsefî akımların çeşitliliği ve aralarındaki bağlantıların karmaşık niteliği vurgulanarak, ayrışmanınmeşruiyeti sorgulanacaktır. Kuşkusuz, tarihten günümüze oldukça farklı hatlarda ilerleyen ve hattabirbirine karşı kayıtsız kaldığı görülebilen birçok felsefe ekolü mevcuttur, ancak buradaki mesele ikifarklı üst kategorinin varlığının dayanakları ile ilgilidir. İkinci bölümde ise ayrışmanınşekillenmesinde etkili olan felsefî düşünceler ve bu düşüncelerin şekillendiği ortamı belirleyensiyasal ve tarihsel gelişmeler üzerinde durulacaktır. Burada özellikle, Soğuk Savaş dönemininideolojik ortamının felsefedeki ayrışmayı derinleştiren doğrudan ve dolaylı ele alınacaktır.
KW  - Metafelsefe
KW  - Analitik Felsefe
KW  - Kıta Felsefesi
KW  - Felsefe Tarihi
KW  - Metafizik
KW  - Felsefe-Bilim İlişkisi
N2  - The division between analytic philosophy and continental philosophy emerged in the 20thcentury and left a lasting mark on the history of philosophy. As this division gained “official” statusin American universities and subsequently spread globally, the fault lines between variousphilosophical movements deepened. This article questions the extent to which this divergence istruly based on philosophical arguments. It is proposed that, at times, the divergence has obscuredthe intricate interconnections within the history of thought and that this situation has developed inparallel with anachronistic interpretations. To support this claim, the intellectual currents andideological polarizations that played a decisive role in the division, as well as the academic rupturesassociated with them, will be examined. In the first part of the article, the legitimacy of the divisionwill be questioned by emphasizing the diversity of philosophical movements and the complex natureof their interconnections. Undoubtedly, there are many philosophical schools that have developedalong quite different lines throughout history, some of which have even remained indifferent to oneanother; however, the issue here concerns the grounds for positing two distinct overarchingcategories. In the second part, the focus will be on the philosophical ideas that played a role in shapingthe division, as well as on the political and historical developments that determined the context inwhich these ideas took form. Particular attention will be given to the ideological climate of the ColdWar period, both in its direct and indirect role in deepening the division within philosophy.
CR  - Adorno, T. W. (2004). Negative Dialectics. (çev. E. B. Ashton). London: Routledge.
CR  - Akehurst, T. L. (2008). The Nazi Tradition: The Analytic Critique of Continental Philosophy in Mid-century Britain. History of European Ideas, 34 (4), 548–557.
CR  - Berlin, I. (1965/2000). The Roots of Romanticism. The A. W. Mellon Lectures in Fine Arts. London: Pimlico.
CR  - Carnap, R. (1932/2021). The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language (çev. A. Pap). Logical Empiricism at its Peak (pp. 10–31). Oxfordshire: Routledge.
CR  - Casati, F. & Wheeler, M. (2016). The Recent Engagement Between Analytic Philosophy and Heideggerian Thought: Metaphysics and Mind. Philosophy Compass 11 (9), 486–498.
CR  - Cooper, D. E. (1994). Analytical and Continental Philosophy. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 94, 1–18.
CR  - Critchley, S. (1997). What is Continental Philosophy? International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 5 (3), 347–64.
CR  - Critchley, S. (2001). Continental Philosophy: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
CR  - Dreben, B. & Floyd, J. (2011). Frege-Wittgenstein Correspondence, Interactive Wittgenstein. Essays in Memory of Georg Henrik von Wright (ed. E. De Pellegrin, pp. 15–73). Dordrecht: Springer.
CR  - Dummett, M. (1993). Origins of Analytical Philosophy. London: Duckworth.
CR  - Engel, P. (1999). Analytic Philosophy and Cognitive Norms. Monist, 82 (2): 218–34.
CR  - Garry, A. (2024). Analytic Feminism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2024 Edition), (ed. Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman). Erişim Tarihi: 28.12.2024 (https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2024/entries/femapproach-analytic/).
CR  - Glendinning, S. (2007). The Idea of Continental Philosophy, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
CR  - Glock, H. (2008). What is Analytic Philosophy? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CR  - Hanna, R. (2001). Kant and the Foundations of Analytic Philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
CR  - Heidegger, M. (2009). Metafizik Nedir? (çev. Y. Örnek). Ankara: Türkiye Felsefe Kurumu Yayınları.
CR  - Humphries, R. (1999). Analytic and Continental: The Division in Philosophy. The Monist, 82 (2), 253–277.
CR  - Levy, N. (2003). Analytic and Continental Philosophy: Explaining the Differences. Metaphilosophy, 34 (3), 284–304.
CR  - McCumber, J. (2011). Time and Philosophy: A History of Continental Thought. Durham: Acumen.
CR  - Mill, J. S. (1950). On Bentham and Coleridge. New York: Harper & Row.
CR  - Overgaard, S., Gilbert, P. & Burwood, S. (2013): An Introduction to Metaphilosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CR  - Quine, W. O. (1976). Two Dogmas of Empiricism. Can Theories be Refuted? Essays on the Duhem-Quine Thesis (ed. S. G. Hardin, pp. 41–64). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
CR  - Quinton, A. (1998). From Wodehouse to Wittgenstein. Manchester: Carcanet Press.
CR  - Redding, P. (2007). Analytic Philosophy and the Return of Hegelian Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
CR  - Reed, D. (2007). Origins of Analytic Philosophy: Kant and Frege. Londra: A&C Black.
CR  - Rethy, R. (2017). Schopenhauer. A Companion to Continental Philosophy. (ed. S. Critchley & R. Schroeder, pp. 139–152). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
CR  - Reynolds, J. (2012). Time, Philosophy, and Chronopathologies. Parrhesia, 15, 64–80.
CR  - Rockmore, T. (2004). On the Structure of Twentieth Century Philosophy, Metaphilosophy, 35 (4).
CR  - Rosen, M. (1998). Continental Philosophy from Hegel. Philosophy, 2, 663–704.
CR  - Rosen, S. (2001). The Identity of, and the Difference Between, Analytical and Continental Philosophy. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 9 (3), 341–348.
CR  - Schuringa, C. (2023). The Birth of Analytic Philosophy out of the Spirit of McCarthyism. Jacobin. Erişim Tarihi: 20.12.2024 (https://jacobin.com/2023/01/analytic-philosophy-mccarthyism-postwar-communism).
CR  - Spurrett, D. (2008). Why I Am Not an Analytic Philosopher, South African Journal of Philosophy, 27 (2), 153–63.
CR  - Tümkaya, S. (2021). Kaç Tane Metafelsefi Yaklaşım Vardır? Dört Öge, 19, 135–151.
CR  - Zahavi, D. (2016). Analytic and Continental Philosophy: From Duality through Plurality to (Some Kind of) Unity. Analytic and Continental Philosophy: Methods and Perspectives. Proceedings of the 37th International Wittgenstein Symposium, 79–94.
UR  - https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.1610494
L1  - https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/4480963
ER  -