Abstract:

Literary critics have long drawn extensively on continental theory, whereas they have taken little interest in analytic philosophy. At times, they have critiqued analytic philosophy as apolitical or pedantic. More often, they ignore its existence. Perhaps they have done so, in part, because its methods have been ill-suited to their projects. Throughout the past few decades, literary critics have often—if not always—embraced two intellectual activities: historical contextualization and political critique. Continental theorists, more than analytic philosophers, have specialized in the performance of those tasks. While continental theorists have tended to approach philosophical concepts like the “good” or the “just” with suspicion, as instruments of political interests, analytic philosophers have put aside those concepts’ historical status, opting instead to describe their contours with precision.