Robert Hanna has a very nice book explaining in a detailed way the problems with the "Analytic philosophy". [That is what you might hear called "British-American," as opposed to Continental. ] He says more or less "good riddance" and the sooner the better.
He coined the phrase "Forward to Kant".
But I did not see so far his approach to Hegel or what he thinks about the Friesian School of Leonard Nelson that has a different approach to Kant that the well known Neo Kant School of Herman Cohen.
[Also I can not imagine that Michael Huemer would totally dismiss Analytic philosophy altogether since it does have a nice tendency to look at things with logical rigor.
[It occurs to me that Leonard Nelson and Hegel are not as different as all that. The world is rational. It is understandable by reason and built in reason as we see in Physics. And Reason has limits. And as Fries and Leonard Nelson argue that reason itself needs to have a starting point of premises you know but do not have an explanation for. That is non intuitive immediate knowledge. These principles all seem fine to me and I can not understand why make a conflict where there is no conflict?]
You might ask by bother? The reason is that the conflict of Jerusalem with Athens Reason and Revelation was more or less solved during the Middle Ages thus: you need both.
He coined the phrase "Forward to Kant".
But I did not see so far his approach to Hegel or what he thinks about the Friesian School of Leonard Nelson that has a different approach to Kant that the well known Neo Kant School of Herman Cohen.
[Also I can not imagine that Michael Huemer would totally dismiss Analytic philosophy altogether since it does have a nice tendency to look at things with logical rigor.
[It occurs to me that Leonard Nelson and Hegel are not as different as all that. The world is rational. It is understandable by reason and built in reason as we see in Physics. And Reason has limits. And as Fries and Leonard Nelson argue that reason itself needs to have a starting point of premises you know but do not have an explanation for. That is non intuitive immediate knowledge. These principles all seem fine to me and I can not understand why make a conflict where there is no conflict?]
You might ask by bother? The reason is that the conflict of Jerusalem with Athens Reason and Revelation was more or less solved during the Middle Ages thus: you need both.
