Book Description

This is a proposal for a new edition of A Companion to Continental Philosophy. The book had a mixed reception, with a number of poor reviews, and US paperback sales have been disappointing (1246 life). Two problems appear to have been an uneveness of quality/accessiblity, and a perceived UK bias in the approach (Simon Critchley, then of Essex, was the lead editor on the 1e, but Bill Schroeder is taking on the 2e). The proposal is still in development to correct for these weaknesses and we have canvassed views from some of the leading voices in the field. Reviews indicate that the book is still regarded as the best single volume reference survey of european/continental philosophy since Kant. Outline The book is a series of primarily expository essays that summarize the important contributions of specific philosophers to the tradition of Continental philosophy. It currently includes 56 articles, plus an Introduction and Afterword. Each of authors commissioned is regarded as an expert on the figure discussed. One editor contributed the Introduction to the entire volume; the other editor contributed the Afterword to it. Contents: The book currently has nine divisions: I. The Kantian Legacy (Problematic of Post-Kantian Philosophy; Kant; Fichte; Romanticism; Schelling; Hegel) II. Overturning the Tradition (Feuerbach; Marx; Kierkegaard; Schopenhauer; Nietzsche; Freud; Bergson III. The Phenomenological Breakthrough (Neo-Kantianism; Husserl; Scheler; Jaspers; Heidegger) IV. Phenomenology, Hegelianism, and Anti-Hegelianism in France: Kojéve; Levinas; Sartre; de Beauvoir; Merleau-Ponty; Bataille; Blanchot V. Religion Without the Limits of Reason: Rosenzweig; Buber; Marcel VI. Three Generations of Critical Theory: Benjamin; Horkheimer; Adorno; Bloch; Marcuse; Habermas; Third Generation VII. Hermeneutics: Schleiermacher; Dilthey; Gadamer; Ricoeur VIII. Continental Political Philosophy: Lukacs; Gramsci; Schmitt; Arendt; Lefort; Catoriadis IX. Structuralism and After: Levi-Strauss, Lacan, Althusser; Foucault; Derrida, Deleuze; Lyotard; Baudrillard; Irigaray; Kristeva; Le Doeuff This structure might need some minor adjustments, but both editors agreed to it for the first edition. Because we may wish to include significant new material, we might want to consider where the existing sections might be cut down. One possibility would be to treat the contributions of structuralists as all of a piece and just have one essay covering them all (plus perhaps Barthes and Saussure). I think Simon was remarkably prescient in including many of these figures, e.g., interest in Le Doeuff and Schmitt has grown. I’m not sure we still need an essay on Lefort. Proposed Changes: (1) Some additional articles on established figures could be commissioned. These may include some of the following figures: Duhem, Bachelard, Canguilhem, Serres, possibly Latour (or perhaps one article covering them all, as French philosophy of science) (I would suggest Gutting for this, as mentioned); Cassirer, Plessner; Gehlen (or perhaps one article covering them all on “Philosophical Anthropology”) (I would suggest Richard Schacht for this); Simone Weil (as an addition to Continental Political Theory); Brentano and Nicholai Hartmann (as possible additions to the Phenomenological Breakthrough); possibly Croce and Ortega y Gasset (though I’m not quite sure where to classify them). Christina Howells might be asked to survey other French feminists since Le Doeuff. (2) In the existing volume, my guess is that about 35% of the articles are fine as they are. Another 40% could definitely be strengthened with another revision, and I think the editors should provide both general guidelines and specific suggestions for these improvements. If these are not forthcoming, the article might then be re-commissioned. As many as 25% of the articles may simply too weak to improve (this is merely an estimate, based on my memory of editing the articles). I would need to carefully re-examine all the articles to make specific recommendations. (3) Some additional articles on more recent figures that have made important, lasting contributions to Continental philosophy, e.g., Badiou and perhaps Honneth. Maybe Zizek or Agamben or Nancy, but I am just not sure about them. (4) Some of the articles, at least to me, seem too weak to retain. I would prefer to re-commission these. Simon is unsure about this at the present time, even prefers not to pursue it. Some reviews have been critical enough of the book, however, to suggest that at least some re-commissioning seems appropriate. At the very least these articles should be revised. (A few other articles just hit the wrong note, e.g., Pippin on Kant. My suggestion here would be to invite the author to redo the article or contribute a different article that would help the book, e.g. the overview introduction to a section.) (5) An additional kind of article of the following sort might be commissioned: Continental Contributions to Ethics, to Aesthetics, to Epistemology, to Philosophy of Language, etc. Finding authors with sufficient command of the entire tradition to do such articles may be difficult, however. Both editors think such articles would strengthen the book. Guidelines for such articles would have to be created and the best people solicited. (6) Some additional editorial material might be created, e.g., overviews that would introduce each section, indicate major disagreements among figures, and provide some perspective on the entire section; a discussion of the background history and parallel theoretical developments. This is still under discussion by the editors of the volume and at Blackwell. I am willing to consider creating some of this additional material, and perhaps an historical overview (if we think this would be worth it) could be commissioned (Robert Solomon might be the sort of person who could attempt it.) We might consider increasing the length of articles on the really important people, e.g., Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, to allow a more complete presentation of their views. We might also consider commissioning articles on Continental philosophy in Italy, in England, in the US. But I’m not as keen on this idea since I’m less sure what such articles would cover.