LEADER 03894nam 2200673 a 450 001 9910456539103321 005 20200520144314.0 010 $a1-281-60501-8 010 $a9786613785701 010 $a0-231-51963-X 024 7 $a10.7312/thom14778 035 $a(CKB)2550000000032581 035 $a(EBL)949012 035 $a(OCoLC)818858125 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000535710 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)12216229 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000535710 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10523778 035 $a(PQKB)10421938 035 $a(StDuBDS)EDZ0000454901 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC949012 035 $a(DE-B1597)459387 035 $a(OCoLC)726828793 035 $a(OCoLC)979832059 035 $a(DE-B1597)9780231519632 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL949012 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10463098 035 $a(EXLCZ)992550000000032581 100 $a20101013d2011 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 14$aThe death of philosophy$b[electronic resource] $ereference and self-reference in contemporary thought /$fIsabelle Thomas-Fogiel ; translated by Richard A. Lynch 210 $aNew York $cColumbia University Press$dc2011 215 $a1 online resource (359 p.) 300 $aDescription based upon print version of record. 311 $a0-231-14778-3 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 327 $apt. 1. The end of philosophy, or the paradoxes of speaking -- pt. 2. Challenging the "death of philosophy" : the reflexive a priori -- pt. 3. The end of philosophy in perspective : the source of the reflexive deficit. 330 $aPhilosophers debate the death of philosophy as much as they debate the death of God. Kant claimed responsibility for both philosophy's beginning and end, while Heidegger argued it concluded with Nietzsche. In the twentieth century, figures as diverse as John Austin and Richard Rorty have proclaimed philosophy's end, with some even calling for the advent of "postphilosophy." In an effort to make sense of these conflicting positions—which often say as much about the philosopher as his subject—Isabelle Thomas-Fogiel undertakes the first systematic treatment of "the end of philosophy," while also recasting the history of western thought itself.Thomas-Fogiel begins with postphilosophical claims such as scientism, which she reveals to be self-refuting, for they subsume philosophy into the branches of the natural sciences. She discovers similar issues in Rorty's skepticism and strands of continental thought. Revisiting the work of late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century philosophers, when the split between analytical and continental philosophy began, Thomas-Fogiel finds both traditions followed the same path—the road of reference—which ultimately led to self-contradiction. This phenomenon, whether valorized or condemned, has been understood as the death of philosophy. Tracing this pattern from Quine to Rorty, from Heidegger to Levinas and Habermas, Thomas-Fogiel reveals the self-contradiction at the core of their claims while also carving an alternative path through self-reference. Trained under the French philosopher Bernard Bourgeois, she remakes philosophy in exciting new ways for the twenty-first century. 606 $aPhilosophy, French$y21st century 606 $aPhilosophy, Modern$y21st century 606 $aReference (Philosophy) 608 $aElectronic books. 615 0$aPhilosophy, French 615 0$aPhilosophy, Modern 615 0$aReference (Philosophy) 676 $a190.9/051 700 $aThomas-Fogiel$b Isabelle$0148463 701 $aLynch$b Richard A$01034931 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910456539103321 996 $aThe death of philosophy$92454345 997 $aUNINA