Main Article Content

Authors

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.
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.