Abstract
In 1919 Cyril Joad, English philosopher and celebrated BBC broadcaster, predicted that “of all the parallel crises of its kind historically recorded, the intellectual volte face in the English estimate of German scholarship during WW1 will surely stand out as immeasurably the most startling”(Joad 1969: 238–239). In the decades preceding the First World War (WW1), England celebrated the intellectual achievements of German scholarship. German-inspired idealism dominated many University philosophy departments and promising students were expected to learn German and to study abroad in Germany. Then came the transformation to which Joad refers and the situation reverses: German philosophy is then considered ‘bad philosophy’ against the merits of the English tradition, which is tasked with saving philosophy from the German threat. Joad advised future scholars not to weigh these anti-German judgements as true or false, but to note that they were the “direct outcome of feelings engendered by the war” (Joad 1969: 238–239).
In this paper, I take Joad’s advice; I understand that WW1 caused a crisis in philosophy that raised the question of philosophy’s relationship to the political. It is in this political scene that we find the origins of our contemporary divide between analytic and Continental philosophy, which has as its rationale the Enlightenment project of distinguishing the reasonable philosopher from the perceived philosophical fanatic or enthusiast. I bring the British and German traditions (represented by Russell and Kant respectively) into dialogue on the topic of this project in order to seek out another way in which to evaluate and respond to the threat of enthusiasm that could assist us in healing the continued rift between Germaninspired ‘continental’ philosophy and British-inspired ‘analytic’ philosophy in the contemporary scene.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
For further evidence of just how widespread the view was see Akehurst (2010).
- 2.
Russell’s proposal was to write about an intellectual tradition moving from Carlyle, Byron, Nietzsche, William James and Bergson and culminating in Mein Kampf (Akehurst 2010: 37).
- 3.
Russell calls this ‘epistemological unity’ and argues it is due to the almost tautological “… fact that my experienced world is what one experience selects from the sum total of existence” (Russell 1949: 101).
- 4.
Kant gives David Hume as an example, calling him ‘a geographer of human reason’, one who conceives the proper domain of reason as the empirical ‘plane’ (Kant 2003: A760/ B788). However, on Kant’s reading, Hume provides, not the true limits of reason, but rather introduces his own dogmatic limitations. Kant may have been thinking of passages such as: “if we take in our hand any volume of divinity or school metaphysics, let us ask, does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number, no. Does it contain any experimental reasoning matter of fact and existence? No. Commit it than to the flames, for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion” (Hume 1975: 165).
- 5.
In the Copernican metaphor, although we do not possess the perspective from the sun and so cannot gain a global view of the earth upon which human reason resides, we can, nevertheless, think as if from that perspective.
- 6.
See ‘The Impossibility of a Sceptical Satisfaction of Pure Reason in its Internal Conflicts’ in The Critique of Pure Reason, (A758/B786-A769/B797).
References
Akehurst, Thomas L. 2010. The cultural politics of analytic philosophy: Britishness and the spectre of Europe. London: Continuum.
Allison, Henry E. 1983. Kant’s transcendental idealism: An interpretation and defense. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Aristophanes. 2000. Clouds. Trans. P. Meineck. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Ayer, A.J. 1982. Logical positivism and its legacy. In Men of ideas: Some creators of contemporary philosophy, ed. Bryan Magee, 94–119. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
———. 1987. Reflections on language, truth and logic. In Logical positivism in perspective: Essays on language, truth and logic, ed. Barry Gower, 23–34. London: Croom Helm.
Berlin, Isaiah. 1990. European Unity and its Vicissitudes. In The crooked timber of humanity: Chapters in the history of ideas, ed. Isaiah Berlin and Henry Hardy, 175–206. London: John Murray.
———. 1997. Political judgement. In The sense of reality: Studies in ideas and their history, ed. Isaiah Berlin and Henry Hardy, 40–53. New York: Straus & Giroux.
———. 2002. Freedom and its betrayal: Six enemies of human liberty. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Fodor, Jerry. 2004. Water’s water everywhere. The London Review of Books 26(20–21): 17–19.
Glendinning, Simon. 2006. Analytic philosophy. In A dictionary of continental philosophy, ed. John Protevi, 23–28. New Haven: Yale Unversity Press.
Hobhouse, Leonard T. 1918. The metaphysical theory of the state. London: Allen & Unwin.
Hume, David. 1975. Enquiries concerning human understanding. Oxford: Oxford UP.
Joad, C.E.M. 1969. Essays in common-sense philosophy. Port Washington: Kennikat.
Kant, I. 2003. Critique of pure reason. Trans. N.K. Smith. London: Macmillan.
Kaufmann, Walter. 1959. From Shakespeare to existentialism: Studies in poetry, religion and philosophy. Boston: Beacon.
Magee, Bryan. 1973. Karl Popper. New York: Viking.
Pocock, J.G.A. 1996. Enthusiasm: The antiself of enlightenment. In The certainty of doubt: Tributes to Peter Munz, ed. Miles Fairburn and Bill Olivier. Victoria: Victoria University Press.
Popper, Karl. 1966. The open society and its enemies, Vol. 2: The high tide of prophecy: Hegel, Marx, and the aftermath. Princeton: Princeton UP.
Quinton, Anthony. 1998. From Wodehouse to Wittgenstein: Essays. New York: St. Martin’s.
Rosen, Stanley. 1965. The role of Eros in Plato’s Republic. The Review of Metaphysics 18(3): 452–475.
Russell, Bertrand. 1948. Human knowledge, its scope and limits. London: Allen and Unwin.
———. 1949. Mysticism and logic, and other essays. London: Allen & Unwin.
———. 1950. Philosophy and politics. In Unpopular essays. London: Allen & Unwin.
———. 1995. An outline of philosophy. London: Routledge.
Ryle, Gilbert. 1947. The open society and its enemies. Mind 56(222): 170–171.
Toscano, Alberto. 2010. Fanaticism: On the uses of an idea. London: Verso.
Wallace, Stuart. 1988. War and the image of Germany: British academics 1914–1918. Edinburgh: John Donald.
Warnock, Geoffrey J. 1958. English philosophy since 1900. Oxford: Oxford UP.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bloor, S. (2017). The Divide Between Philosophy and Enthusiasm: The Effect of the World Wars on British Attitudes Towards Continental Philosophies. In: Sharpe, M., Jeffs, R., Reynolds, J. (eds) 100 years of European Philosophy Since the Great War. Philosophical Studies in Contemporary Culture, vol 25. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50361-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50361-5_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-50360-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-50361-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)