The philosophical research: conceptual analysis versus historical analysis?
Main Article Content
In this work, my question is about the nature of philosophical research. With this purpose I try to compare two different perspectives: the first, analytical, the second historical. I attempt to identify a real tensión between both perspectives. However, I try to show an inteligible way to resolve this tension. In order to clarify the philosphical landscape, I distinguish two properties of analytical research: universality and conceptual necessity, respectively. In addition, I contrast the Bernard Williams and Richard Rorty’s glimpse about the nature of philosophical analysis. I hold the thesis according to wich Rorty not include relevante things about philosophy, and as contrary approach, I defend a type of perspective with the virtue of including some important questions as, for example, conceptual universality and variability, immutability and change of concepts, and so on.
- philosphical research
- conceptual analysis
- history of concepts
- philosophical universalism
- conceptual necessity.
Lariguet, G. (2016). The philosophical research: conceptual analysis versus historical analysis?. Praxis Filosófica, (42), 219–244. https://doi.org/10.25100/pfilosofica.v0i42.3174
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
De acuerdo con nuestra política (Licencia Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) los artículos presentados y sometidos al proceso editorial en la revista Praxis Filosófica no tienen costo alguno para sus autores ni retribuciones económicas para la revista. El artículo de carácter inédito, producto de investigación o de algún proyecto que se presente a Praxis Filosófica, no podrá estar sometido a otro proceso de publicación durante el proceso que se lleve en nuestra revista.