2 ms·
Yeah, that dismissive, condescending view of Bergson is par for the course of many Analytic's attitudes towards Continentals (though Bergson himself was not par
by pmoriarty 7y ago
Yeah, that dismissive, condescending view of Bergson is par for the course of many Analytic's attitudes towards Continentals (though Bergson himself was not part of the Continental tradition).
Sure, such condescension may be the best that Russell can muster, but I'm not sure you'd get a charitable reading of Bergson (or any other philosopher Russell didn't like) from someone so hostile and unappreciative of him.
Russell did take Nietzsche more seriously, but to me it seems Nietzsche just went over Russell's head. Russell is best at reading other philosophers who, like himself, are clear, easy to understand, and relatively conventional.
- yboris 7y agoContinental philosophers were approaching the topic of philosophy very differently. Much of it comes off as convoluted nonsense: rather than clarity of expression it feels like mysticism for which you need a 'guru' to elaborate and elucidate. To take existentialism, the basic message is "you have to decide and take control of your life". Sure, that sounds good, but what is the advice about how to do it? Existentialism seems to offer no guide.