Top Banner
1 Sketch for a Theory of the History of Philosophy Uriah Kriegel My aims in this essay are two. First (§§1-4), I want to get clear on the very idea of a theory of the history of philosophy, the idea of an overarching account of the evolution of philosophical reflection since the inception of written philosophy. And secondly (§§5-8), I want to actually sketch such a global theory of the history of philosophy, which I call the two-streams theory. I. On the Very Idea of A Theory of the History of Philosophy 1. History vs. Chronology Let us start with the distinction between a history and a chronology. A chronology is an unstructured list of things that happened – or more accurately, a list structured only temporally, that is, by earlier-than, simultaneous-with, and later-than relations. Chronologies were prominent, for instance, in early Greek historiography of the 6th and 5th centuries BCE (think of Herodotus’ Histories). Especially when information is scarce, chronologies are extremely valuable. But the idea of a history connotes something that goes beyond a chronology. A history is not just a list of events, but an attempt at understanding longitudinal processes of development (evolution) and break or turning points (revolutions). Thus history goes beyond chronology in incorporating an element of theorization or interpretation – at bottom: an attempt at sense-making. To do so, it takes the (nearly) unstructured list of events and imposes some structure or organization on it. At the very least, it supplements the list’s temporal structure with a causal structure. One might think of a chronology of philosophy in a number of ways. It could be a list of all philosophers, a list of all philosophical ideas, or a list of all philosophical texts. In practice focus has been on philosophers as the standard nodes in
23

sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

Aug 12, 2020

Download

Documents

dariahiddleston
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

1

SketchforaTheoryoftheHistoryofPhilosophy

UriahKriegel

Myaimsinthisessayaretwo.First(§§1-4),Iwanttogetclearontheveryideaofatheoryofthehistoryofphilosophy,theideaofanoverarchingaccountoftheevolutionofphilosophicalreflectionsincetheinceptionofwrittenphilosophy.Andsecondly(§§5-8),Iwanttoactuallysketchsuchaglobaltheoryofthehistoryofphilosophy,whichIcallthetwo-streamstheory.

I. OntheVeryIdeaofATheoryoftheHistoryofPhilosophy

1.Historyvs.Chronology

Letusstartwiththedistinctionbetweenahistoryandachronology.Achronologyisanunstructuredlistofthingsthathappened–ormoreaccurately,aliststructuredonlytemporally,thatis,byearlier-than,simultaneous-with,andlater-thanrelations.Chronologieswereprominent,forinstance,inearlyGreekhistoriographyofthe6thand5thcenturiesBCE(thinkofHerodotus’Histories).Especiallywheninformationisscarce,chronologiesareextremelyvaluable.Buttheideaofahistoryconnotessomethingthatgoesbeyondachronology.Ahistoryisnotjustalistofevents,butanattemptatunderstandinglongitudinalprocessesofdevelopment(evolution)andbreakorturningpoints(revolutions).Thushistorygoesbeyondchronologyinincorporatinganelementoftheorizationorinterpretation–atbottom:anattemptatsense-making.Todoso,ittakesthe(nearly)unstructuredlistofeventsandimposessomestructureororganizationonit.Attheveryleast,itsupplementsthelist’stemporalstructurewithacausalstructure.

Onemightthinkofachronologyofphilosophyinanumberofways.Itcouldbealistofallphilosophers,alistofallphilosophicalideas,oralistofallphilosophicaltexts.Inpracticefocushasbeenonphilosophersasthestandardnodesin

Page 2: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

2

philosophicalchronologies.Thismakescertainsense:philosophicaltextsareonlyinterestinginsofarastheyexpressphilosophicalideas,andfragmentaryphilosophicalideascoalesceintosubstantivephilosophicalconceptions,typically,intheintellectsofindividualthinkers.Demarcatingwhatmakesagiventhinkeraphilosopher(orforthatmatterwhatmakesanideaortextphilosophical)isofcoursequitethechestnut,butletusbracketthisquestionhere.WhatIwanttohighlightatthispointisonlythatachronologyofphilosophyisthestartingpointforanyhistoryofphilosophy.Itgivesusthematerial,thedata,forhistoricaltheorizing.

Incurrenthistoriographyof(Western)philosophy,inpracticethisconsistsintwotypesofresearch,plusanoutlier.Thefirsttypeofresearchisworkonthecorrectinterpretationofanindividualthinker:WasBoethiusreallyanominalist?WhatdidLeibnizmeanwithhiscrypticbutfoundationalremarkthatthemonadshavenowindows?WhatexactlywasRussell’stheoryofjudgment?Theotherlineofresearchconcernsthe(re)discoveryofunknownorlesser-knownthinkersandinterpretationoftheirideas.Therecentflourishofresearchintonon-canonizedthinkers,oftenfemale,fallswithinthisline.WhowasGeorgeStoutandwhatwerehisdistinctivephilosophicalaccomplishments?WhowasMargaretCavendishandwhatexactlywasherpositiononthemind-bodyproblem?WhowasGersonidesandwhatwashisdistinctivecontributiontoJewishAverroism?Answerstosuchquestionsconstitutecontributionstowardanaccuratechronologyofphilosophy.Inaddition,andthisismoreofanoutlierinthehistoriographyofphilosophy,somehistoriansoccasionallyattempttosynthesizeothers’interpretiveworkintosomethinglikeaself-consciouschronology.IncurrentresearchthegoldstandardforthisisPeterAdamson’smasterfulseriesofbooksonthe“historyofphilosophywithoutanygaps.”

Onthebasisofchronologiesdevisedandrefinedthroughthesetypesofresearch,onemaythengoontotheorizeabouttheunfoldingovertimeofphilosophicalideas.Butwhatdoes“theorizing”onthehistoryofphilosophyconsistin?

2.WhatisaTheoryoftheHistoryofPhilosophy?

Modelingagainongeneralhistoriography,Iwishtodistinguishfourmainstagesofpotentialtheorizinginthehistoriographyofphilosophy.Theycorrespondto(i)singularcausation,(ii)processes,(iii)causallaws,and(iv)overallor“total”theory.

Givenacompletechronologyofthingsthathappened,onemightwishinthefirstinstancetoidentifyindividualcausallinksbetweentwoparticularevents.Thisissingularcausation:thethrowingoftherockcausedtheshutteringofthewindow,the

Page 3: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

3

crashcausedtheexplosion,andsoon.Identifyingindividualcausallinksisthefirststageofhistoricalsense-making.Thesecondstageistheidentificationofcertainchainsofsingular-causallinks.Wemaythinkofsequencesofsuchindividualcausallinksthatexhibittherightkindofinternalcohesionasprocesses,leadingnon-accidentallyfromastartpointtoanendpoint.Thisisprobablythelevelofanalysisthatcharacterizesmostcloselyacademichistorians’researchnowadays.

Athirdandmoreambitiousstageofhistoricaltheorizing,onethatdefinitelydoesnotcharacterizetypicalhistoriographicresearchthesedays,wouldattempttoidentifylawsofhistory.Wemovefromsingularcausationtocausallawswhenwenoticethattokeneventsexemplifyingcertainevent-typestendtocausetokeneventsthatexemplifyotherevent-types.Thecausallawlinkstheeventtypes:thethrowingofrocksofsuch-and-suchweighttendstocausetheshutteringofwindowsofsuch-and-suchdensity.Itishealthy,ofcourse,toapproachthehistoryofhumanitywithacertainskepticismabouttheveryexistenceofsuchlaws;butarguably,itiswiththeintroductionofsuchhistoricallaws,ifsuchtherebe,thathistorywouldearnitsstatusasascience(onthis,seeComte’sCours).Finally,wecanenvisage,evenmorespeculatively,thatthereisasingleunifiedstructuretohumanhistoryasawhole.ThisiswhatIcalled“totalhistory.”Thebest-knownexampleofthisisprobablyHegel’sdialecticaltheoryofhistoryintermsoftheprogressofthehumanspirit,embodiedinthestate,throughthreestagesofeverincreasingfreedom:fromtheearlyAsianempires(notablyChinaandPersia),whereonlythedespotwasfree,throughtheGreco-Romanworldwhereonlytherulingeliteswerefree,totheGermanworld(whatelse?),whereeverybodyisfree.Ifitwashealthytoapproachwithskepticismthenotionofhistoricallaw,itispositivelyunhealthynottoapproachwithskepticismtheideaofanoverallpatternin(ordirectionof)history;nonethelessatotaltheoryrepresentstheholygrailofhistoriography,parallelinsomerespectstotheunificationofquantummechanicsandrelativityintoasingleoverarchingtheoryoffundamentalphysics.

Aswithgeneralhistoriography,researchinthehistoriographyofphilosophyisrifethattargetsindividualcausallinks,inthiscasebetweenindividualthinkers.WhenwestudyAristotle’sinfluenceonAquinas,orDescartes’onSpinoza,orCarnap’sonQuine,weconductthistypeofresearch.Oftenthecausalinfluenceisacknowledgedbythelaterthinker,butsometimesitsextentisunclearpriortocloseanalysis.

Rarerincurrenthistoriographyofphilosophyisresearchintoprocessesinthehistoryofphilosophy.Nonetheless,wetargetsuchprocesseswhenwestudytheevolutionofbroadlyScholasticmetaphysicsfromAquinasinthe13thtoSuarezinthe16thcentury(see,e.g.,RobertPasnau’sMetaphysicalThemes:1274-1671);the

Page 4: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

4

evolutionofGermanIdealismfromKanttoHegel(see,e.g.,TerryPinkard’sGermanPhilosophy1760-1860);orofanalyticphilosophyfromFrege,Moore,andRusselltoQuine,Davidson,andbeyond(see,e.g.,ScottSoames’TheAnalyticTraditioninPhilosophy).

Incontrast,researchfocusedonthesearchfor“lawsofhistoryofphilosophy”–wherebylawlikecausalpatternsgoverningtheformationofnewphilosophicalideasrecurringacrossdifferentsegmentsofthehistoryofphilosophy–isessentiallynonexistentnowadays.Ditto,ofcourse,foranexplicitlyarticulatedtotaltheoryofthehistoryofphilosophy(wherebyacertainunityof“sense”issought,perhapsencapsulatingadirectionality).Thistypeofresearchhasvanishedfromthehistoriographyofphilosophyjustasmuchasithasfromgeneralhistoriography.Itisanopenquestionwhetherthisreflectsametaphysicalconvictionthathistoryhasnolawsandnounity;amoreepistemologicalsuspicionthatevenifthereweresuchlawsorsuchunity,wesimplycouldnot,withtheevidenceatourdisposal,hopetopindownwithanyaccuracyorprecisionanythingresemblingagenerallaw;orjustthekindofinstitutionalpressuretowardeverincreasingspecializationthatcharacterizesjustasmuchastrophysicsandneurobiology,say.

Inanycase,itisworthnotingthatalthoughcontemporaryhistoriographyofphilosophydoesnotfeatureresearchintorecurrentpatternsorlawsofhistory,muchlessintoaputativeoverarchingunityordirectioninthehistoryofphilosophy,nordoesanyworkbyhistoriansofphilosophysuggestarefutationoftheideaslawlikepatternsoroverarchingunity.Thereisnotevenanexplicitstatementdenyingthefruitfulnessofanyresearchonsuchquestions.Thewholequestionisjustcompletelyofftheradarincontemporaryhistoriographyofphilosophy.Intheabsenceofanyconsiderationsfororagainstthequestionsofhistoricallawsoroverarchingunity,wemaygrantourselvespermission,Ipropose,todabbleindisciplinedspeculationonthesematters.

Wemaythinkofthispartofthehistoriographyofphilosophyasneedingtomakeaninitialdeterminationastotherelativeplausibilityofthreepositions:

[Skepticism] Therearenohistoricallaws,muchlessanunderlyingunity,tobefoundinthehistoryofphilosophy.

[Optimism] Thereisnounderlyingunityinthehistoryofphilosophy,buttherearerecurrentlawswecanidentifyandformulate.

[Exuberance]Therearelawsgoverninghistoricalevolutionofphilosophicalideas,andacertainunderlyingunitytheyembodyorexemplify.

Page 5: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

5

Optimistsmaythendividedependingonthekindsofhistoricallawstheyhypothesize,andtheexuberantmustcomedownonaparticularaccountoftheoverarchingunityinthehistoryofphilosophy.Inthenextsection,wetakealookatwhatistomyknowledgethemostrecentexuberantaccountofthehistoryofphilosophy,developedbyFranzBrentano(heof“intentionalityasthemarkofthemental”)inthelastdecadeofthe19thcentury.Itmightbeuseful,Iamthinking,toseehowthissortofthingmightlook.

3.ACaseStudy

ItisnotpartofBrentano’stheoryofthehistoryofphilosophythatittendstowardanendpoint.ThereisnodirectionofhistoryhereinthewayHegelandMarxclaimedforhumanhistoryingeneral.Moreover,forBrentanothereisnolinearprogressioninthehistoryofphilosophyofthesortwemayobserveinthehistoryoftheexactandnaturalsciences.Ratherthehistoryofphilosophyresemblesmorearthistory,wherephasesofgreatcreativitygeneratinggenuinevaluearefollowedbysuccessivephasesofdecline.

Inparticular,claimsBrentano,therearefourphasesofphilosophicaldevelopmentsthatrepeatthemselvesineveryeraofphilosophy.Thefirstphaseistheonethatgeneratesgreatphilosophicalvalueandcarriesthetorchofphilosophicalprogress.Itismarkedbytwomaincharacteristics:apurelytheoreticalimpulse,groundedintruewonderattheworld,andanaturalisticmethodthatadaptsitselftoitssubjectmatter.Thisfirstphaseisthenfollowedbythreesuccessivephasesofevergrosserdecline.Inthesecondphase,apracticalmindsetsubstitutesthespiritoftheoreticalwonder,andinconsequence,theappliedmethodologybecomeslooserandmoreapproximative.Thisleadsinevitably,thinksBrentano,tolossoffaithintheadvancementofphilosophicalunderstanding,andultimatelyushersinathirdphase,characterizedbyskepticism.However,becausesuchskepticismcanneverquenchourinherentthirstforknowledgeandunderstanding,itissoonreplacedbyakindofmysterianormysticalinclinationcharacterizedbyfacileandunprincipledbeliefformation.Inthisfourthphasewelingeruntilaneweraofphilosophybegins,studdedwithcreativeinnovationsfueledbypurelytheoreticalinterestandoiledbysoundmethodology.

Brentano’scaseforthisrecurringpatternisbriefandconsistsinclaiminganaturalplacingofsomeprominentfiguresinthehistoryofphilosophyineachphaseofeachera.TheschemeisdisplayedinTable1.

Page 6: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

6

theoreticalphase

practicalphase

skepticalphase

mysterianphase

AncientPhilosophy

AnaxagorastoAristotle

StoicismandEpicureanism

PyrrhonianSkepticism

Neoplatonism

MedievalPhilosophy

Aquinas(andDominicans)

Scotus(andFranciscans)

Ockham(andnominalists)

Eckhart,Cusanus,etc.

ModernPhilosophy

FrancisBaconandDescartes

TheEnlightenment

Hume Reid,Kant,andtheIdealists

Table1.Brentano’sInterpretationoftheHistoryofPhilosophy

TheschemenaturallyplacesBrentano’sphilosophicalheroes–Aristotle,Aquinas,andDescartes–inthefirst,ascendantphases,andassociateshisnemesesKantandHegelwithmysticssuchasMeisterEckhart.ItalsohasthefortuitousifsomewhatmegalomaniacimplicationthatwithBrentanohimselfafourtheraofphilosophicalrejuvenationisabouttostart.Butsettingasidetheseproblematicfeatures,Brentano’sscheme,ifaccepted,wouldhavethegreatvirtueofimposingaclearorganizationonthehistoryofphilosophyintoto,thusmakingsenseofit.Insteadofalonglistofprominentthinkers,wewouldgetahighlystructurednarrative.

Inparticular,Brentano’stheoryofthehistoryofphilosophyclearlyprovidesuswithlawsofhistoricaldevelopment.Wecanthinkofsuchstatementsas“askepticalphaseleadstoamysterianphase”ascapturingabasickindoflaw.Inaddition,however,wecanseethestatement“eacheraischaracterizedbythesameprogressionthroughfourphases”asasortofsupremehistoricallaw,thelawthatcaptures,inaway,thedeepuniformityinthehistoryofphilosophy.

OnemayquibbleofcoursewiththespecificsofBrentano’stheory.WhyandhowdidAquinasgettobethefirstMedievalphilosopher,wonderedÉtienneGilson,perhapsthegreatestmedievalistofthefirsthalfofthe20thcentury–dowenothaveoverhalfamillenniumofmedievalphilosophicalreflectionbeforehim?Likewise,wemaywonderwhetherReidisreallyamysterian.BrentanotreatshimsobecauseReidgroundsallknowledgeinotherwiseungrounded“commonsensebeliefs.”ThisseemsabitthinasareasontolumpReidtogetherwiththelikesofPlotinusandHegel.Infact,theattachmenttocommonsenseseems,intemperamentatleast,alltheoppositeoftheallureofmysticalflights.

Moredeeply,Ifinditmorethanalittlesuspiciousthattheorganizationofchronologiesintocyclesfeaturingthebattleofgoodversusevil,witheventualrebirthofthegoodtolaunchanewcycle–thisabstractandsomewhatcartoonishpattern–,is

Page 7: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

7

sucharecurringthemeinmanytraditions’quasi-mythologicalhistories.Eventhenumberfourseemstocomeuptimeandagaininthesesystems,forinstanceinHinduandZoroastrianconceptionsofhistory.Mighttherenotbesomethingaboutourcognitivehardwiringthatpushesustoimposecyclical-cum-tetralogicalorderonthephenomena,insteadofitbeingthephenomenathemselvesthatrecommendthesefour-phasecycles?

Inaddition,onemayalsoraiseaneyebrowaboutBrentano’sdogmaticacceptanceofthestandardperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophyintermsofAncient,Medieval,andModerneras.Thisperiodizationleavesmuchtobedesired,aswewillnowdiscuss.

4.Periodization

Perhapsthemostelementarywaytoimposeinitialstructureonanotherwiseunstructuredlistofeventsisthroughperiodization:segmentingthelistintomoreorlessself-containedsub-lists.Althoughinitselfamerelytemporalspecification,thechoiceofperiodizationreflectsacertainconceptionofthecausalcoherenceinternaltoeachperiod,withpassagetoanewperiodindicatingabreakinnormalprocessesofdevelopment.Tothatextent,theperiodizationweadoptofanyhistorybetraysacommitmenttoabird’seyeviewanalysisofthemajorstreaksinthathistory.

Themoststandardperiodizationofhumanhistory,theonewealllearnedatschool,startshistorywiththeadventofhistoricalrecords(dismissingeverythingpriortothatas“pre-history”)anddividinghistoryintothreemainperiods:theAncientworld,goingroughlyfromthefoundingofRomeinthemid-8thcenturyBCEtoitscollapseattheendofthe5thcenturyCE;theMiddleAges,spanningroughly500-1500;andModernity,from“theageofdiscovery”circa1500tothepresent.Wherefromcametoourschoolsthisparticularperiodization?Theanswerisnotentirelyclear.EarlyRenaissancethinkers,notablyPetrarchandLeonardoBruni,havealreadydividedWesternhistoryintothreeimportantsegments,inwhichthedarkMiddleAgesinterruptedtheintellectualandculturalgrowthofideasintheAncientGreco-Romanworld,tobereborn,sotospeak,withtheRenaissance.Thisperiodizationwaspopularizedinthe17thcenturybytheGermanhistorianChristophKeller(a.k.a.Cellarius).Butthemodelbecameentrenched,andenrichedwiththeconceptof“prehistory,”primarilythroughtheGermanEnlightenment;theworksofAugustLudwigvonSchlözeron“universalhistory”inthefinalthirdofthe18thcenturyarerepresentativehere.

Page 8: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

8

Asweknow,thestandardperiodizationofthehistoryof(Western)philosophy,inscribedintheacademiccurriculum,isessentiallythesame:wehave(1)AncientPhilosophy,goingfromThalesinthe7thcenturyBCEtocirca500;(2)MedievalPhilosophy,goingbasicallyfrom500to1600;and(3)ModernPhilosophy,startingwithDescartesintheearly17thcenturyandstillongoing.Eachofthesemega-periodsalsoadmitsofamoreorlessstandardsub-periodizationinthecurriculum.ThuswedivideAncientPhilosophyinto(1.1)thePre-Socratics(7th–5thBCE),(1.2)Socrates,Plato,andAristotle,(1.3)Hellenisticphilosophy(4thBCE–3rdCE),and(1.4)LateAntiquity(3rd–6thCE);MedievalPhilosophyinto(2.1)theEarlyMiddleAges(6th–10thCE),(2.2)theHighMiddleAges(11th–13th),and,sometimesbutnotalwayssetapart,(2.3)RenaissancePhilosophy(14th–16th);whileModernPhilosophywedivideinto(3.1)EarlyModern(17th-18th,DescartestoKant),(3.2)19th-centuryphilosophy,and(3.3)20thcenturytothepresent(startingwithFrege,Moore,andRussellforanalyticphilosophy,Husserlforphenomenology).

Acuriousfeatureofthisstandardperiodizationisthatitisentirelyderivativefromtheperiodizationofhumanhistoryingeneral–ittakesintoaccountexactlynothingspecifictothedevelopmentofphilosophicalideas.Thisisintruthveryodd.Istherereallyareasonweshouldexpectphilosophicalturningpointstoalignsoperfectlywithturningpointsinthehistoryofhumanitymoregenerally?Perhapsthereissuchareason,say,asfaraspoliticalphilosophyisconcerned.Butwhenitcomestometaphysics,say,itwouldbeverysurprisingiftheriseandfallofRomeshouldcoincidewiththeriseandfallofabstracta,orifthe“ageofdiscovery”thatusheredinModernityhappenedtocoincidewiththeriseofidealism.Atanyrate,evenifmajoreventsinhumanhistorydidtriggerimportantphilosophicaldevelopments,whyshouldtheabsenceofmajorhistoricaleventsencouragetheabsenceofimportantphilosophicaldevelopments?Wemight,onthecontrary,expectlong-termstabilitytoprovidethefoundationsforcontemplativeprogress;orwemightexpectindividualgeniustoshowupincompleteindependenceofhistoricalcontext.

Assoonaswetakecriticaldistancefromthisstandardperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophy,itsflawsbecomeinstantlyevident.Iwillnameonlytwo.

Arguably,themostimportant,mostdecisivecenturyinthewholeof(Western)philosophyisthatfromPlato’sbirthtoAristotle’sdeath.WhiteheadfamouslysaidthatthephilosophicaltraditionconsistsinaseriesoffootnotestoPlato.AsIwilllatersuggest,Whiteheadwashalfrightandverywrong:itwouldbemoreaccuratetosaythathalfthephilosophicaltraditionconsistsinfootnotesto(i.e.,elaborationsof)Plato;theotherhalfconsistsinfootnotesto/elaborationsofAristotle.Yetthispivotalsub-periodoccursinthemiddleofthestandardperiodwecallAncientPhilosophy.Ina

Page 9: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

9

properperiodization,Isuggest,thatfatefulcenturywouldlaunchanewstageinthehistoryofphilosophy.Thisisaninstancewhereacrucialjunctureinthehistoryofphilosophycorrespondstonopivotaleventinthelargerhistoryofhumanaffairs.

Secondly(andconversely),whenwelookforamajorphilosophicalturningpointtoaccompanythefallofRomein476,andtosignalatransitionfromthefirsttothesecondgreatsupposedperiodsofWesternphilosophy,wecomeupblank.ThebestcandidateissurelyBoethius’ConsolationofPhilosophy,aswellashisearliercommentariesonAristotleandPorphyry.ButalthoughBoethiuswasveryinfluentialintheMiddleAges,heisgenerallyregardedasarelativelyderivativethinker,mostlycombiningandmodifyingfamiliarAristotelian,Neoplatonist,andChristianideas.AnditisnoteworthythatmostphilosophygraduatestodayearntheirB.A.withouteverhearingofBoethiusintheclassroom–orindeedoutsideit.Clearly,then,wedonotinfactdesignateBoethiusasacrucialfiguremarkingaturningpointinthehistoryofphilosophy.

Tobeclear,IampersonallyabigfanofBoethius,whomItaketohaveastrongclaimtobeingthefirst(Western)nominalist.Butmypointisonceremovedfromthefirst-orderquestionofthemeritinBoethius’philosophicalideas.ThequestionIamraisingisratherthis:sincewedonotinfacttakeBoethiustorepresentanythinglikethekindofturningpointinthehistoryofphilosophythatwetakethefalloftheRomanEmpiretobeinWesternhistory,whydowealigntheperiodizationofthehistoryphilosophywiththatofthehistoryofhumanaffairswritlarge?Thisalignmentseemsintruthentirelyartificial.

Why,then,dowecutupthehistoryofphilosophythewaywedo?Onelineofthoughtisthatanyperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophyisboundtobearbitrarytosomeextent,sowemightaswelladoptanotherwisefamiliarframeworkforcuttingitup.Now,inthisform,theclaimseemstomeatadtoostrong–surelysomeputativeperiodizationsarebetterthanothers.Nonetheless,itisquitelikelythatamultiplicityofpossibleperiodizationswouldproveequallygood,atleastfromcertainperspectives,andanywaythereareprobablyno“factsofthematter”aboutthecorrectperiodization.However,thispointbyitselfdoesnotquitejustifyuncriticalacceptanceofthestandardperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophy.Infact,itencouragesthefloatingofalternativeperiodizationsandtheircomparisonwiththestandardoneandwithoneanother.

II. TheParallel-StreamsTheory

Page 10: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

10

5.TwoPhilosophicalTemperaments

IntheremainderofthispaperIwanttosketchthekindoftheoryofthehistoryofphilosophythatIfindmostinitiallyappealing.IndeedItakethistobethemostbanalandundaringtheoryofthehistoryofphilosophyonemightcomeupwith.Itsmainvirtueisjustinbeingatheory–atheoryofthehistoryofphilosophyasawhole.

Iwillstartbysketchingaportraitoftwoopposingphilosophicaltemperaments.IwillcallthemTemperamentAandTemperamentBtoavoidanybaggagethatmightcomewithmoreilluminatinglabels,thoughonewouldnotbetoofaroffthemarkifinsteadonecalledthemthePlatonistandAristoteliantemperaments.Iwillthensketchawaytomodelthedevelopmentofphilosophicalideasintermsoftheinteractionofthreeforcesfeedingintoindividualthinkers’work,resultingintheparalleldevelopmenttowardtheself-articulation,ifyouwill,ofastable,maximallyplausibleA-typeworldviewandastable,maximallyplausibleB-typeworldview.

Myportraitofthetwotemperaments,inTable2,isinthestyleofcaricature.IimaginethatasinglephilosopherembodiesallA-typetemperamentalcharacteristicsandanotherembodiesallB-typecharacteristics.Inpractice,thevastmajorityofphilosophersarethankfullymorecomplexintellectualpersonalities.Butcaricaturehasitsexpositoryvirtues.

TemperamentA TemperamentB

inmetaphysics,

awelcomingattitudetowardallmannersofabstractaanduniversals,seennotjustasnecessaryconcessionsbutasagreeableliberatorsfromthedrearinessofconcretereality;

amarkedpreferencefornominalismanddesertlandscapes,notjustasoutputsoffair-mindedevaluationofargumentsbutasapreconditionforaseriousattempttomakesenseoftheworld;

in(thepartofmetaphysicswenowcall)philosophyofmind,

ananti-materialistinstinctthatspansthegamutofdualism,idealism,andotherwaysofrecognizingsomethingotherthanbrutematteramongtheungroundedgroundsofreality;

astrongattachmenttomaterialism(or“physicalism”inthenewfangledjargon);

inepistemology,

atendencytowardrationalismandintuitionism,withafaithina

anempiricistinclinationtobaseallknowledgeonobservational

Page 11: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

11

Table2.CaricatureofTwoBasicPhilosophicalTemperaments

Averysimilaroppositionisproposed,incidentally,byWilliamJamesinChap.1ofPragmatism.Jamesdistinguishesbetween“twokindsofphilosopher,”oneofwhomhecallstender-mindedandcharacterizesas“Rationalistic(goingby‘principles’),Intellectualistic,Idealistic,Optimistic,Religious,Free-Willist,Monistic,Dogmatical”;theotherhecallstough-mindedandcharacterizesas“Empiricist(goingby‘facts’),Sensationalistic,Materialistic,Pessimistic,Irreligious,Pluralistic,Sceptical.”IbracketforpresentpurposesthequestionofwhetherJames’isinfactthesamedistinction,butwithdifferencesofemphasisduetodifferentphilosophicalclimate,orasimilarbut

prioriprinciplesasepistemicfoundationsfromwhichtherestofourknowledgeisdeductivelyinferred;

encounterwithparticularfacts–datedandlocalizedoccurrences–andinductiveratherthandeductiveinferencefromthem;

inmoralphilosophy,

arationalistapproachthatseekstoderivecommonlyacceptedmoralpreceptsfromapriorimoralprinciples;

amoresentimentalistattempttogroundmoralunderstandinginconcreteemotionalexperienceratherthanpurereason;

inphilosophicalmethodology,

awillingnesstoacceptmysterianandsometimesevenmysticalelementsinacompletepictureoftheworld(footnote:forreligiousphilosophers,entercredoquiaabsurdumetc.);

anaturalismthatputsapremiumonexplanationsthatappealonlytopositsinternaltothespatiotemporalrealm(footnote:forreligiousphilosophers,substituterationaltheism);

inmeta-philosophicalsensibility,

atirelessmonismconvincedthatthepluralityinappearancemustbelieanultimateunityinnoumenalreality,andindeedthatrealityonlybecomesfullyintelligiblewhenthisunityisuncovered;

askepticalattitudetowardthemonisticdriveandagreatertrustinpluralisticaccountsthatresistforcingunityonthephenomena;

inphilosophicalprose,

anemphasisontheliteraryandHumanisticqualitiesofpresentationandanacknowledgementoftheroleofrhetoricincommunicatingideas.

adryandliteralstylethatprizesclarityandprecisionaboveallandtakesasitsmodelsciencewritingratherthanliterature.

Page 12: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

12

slightlydifferentdistinction.IjustmeantosignalacertainprecedenttothedistinctionIdrawbetweenTemperamentsAandB.

Asnoted,itisnaturaltoseePlatoandAristotleasprototypesoftype-Aandtype-Bphilosophers.(HereIuse“prototype”intheindustrialsenseoftheterm,sotospeak;inthesenseinwhichitisusedinthecognitivepsychologyofconcepts,tomeansomethinglikeparadigm,thehonorsmaygorathertoPlotinusandHume.)Plato’swell-knownmetaphysicsofa-spatialanda-temporalFormsaswhatismostreal,hisidealismandargumentsfortheincorporealityandimmortalityofthesoul,aswellashisaccountofknowledgeasinnateandonlyrecalled(ratherthanacquired)withtheaidofsenseperception–allpresentalreadyinthePhaedo–testifytohisAtemperament;andofcoursePlato’sdialoguesaffordsomeofthegreatestliterarydelightsofallphilosophicalprose.Meanwhile,Aristotle’sfocusonthemetaphysicsofmaterialobjectsandhisunderstandingofinreuniversalsasenclosedwithinspacetime,hisintegratedhylomorphistaccountofthemind-bodyrelationship,hisstraightforwardempiriciststatement,inDeAnimaIII,that“ifwedidnotperceiveanything,wewouldnotlearnorunderstandanything,”andhisappreciationforthevarietyandmultiplicityofphenomena,perhapsmostevidentinhisbiologicalworks,allstandintestimonytohisBtemperament;butnoreaderoftheMetaphysicswouldaccuseitsauthorofexcesslyricism,howeverawestruckwemightbebyhissheerbrainpower.

6.TwoParallelStreams

ItisusefulformyproposedtheoryofthehistoryofphilosophythatPlatoandAristotlefittheAandBmoldssowell,becauseforalmosttwomillenniafollowingthem,thehistoryofphilosophywasalmostself-consciouslytheresultoftheongoingcompetitivejuxtapositionofaPlatonistandanAristotelianworldview,modulotheoccasionaldismissalofbothasrelicsofdangerouspaganismortheirattemptedsynthesisintoasingleworldviewof“thephilosopher.”AllthewayuptotheRenaissancewefindphilosopherstimeandagaindesignatingthemselvesasPlatonistorAristotelian,ordedicatingthemselvestocommentaryoranalysisofPlatonicand/orAristoteliantexts.Frommyperspective,though,itisnotPlatoandAristotlethemselvesthatdefinethesubsequentunfoldingofthehistoryofphilosophy.Rather,theyplaythespecialrolestheydoonlybecausetheyhappentoofferearlyandnear-perfectembodimentsofTemperamentsAandB.

Insofarastwothousandyearsof(Western)philosophyself-consciouslylendthemselvestomodelingintermsofacompetitivejuxtapositionofearlyembodiments

Page 13: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

13

ofTemperamentAandTemperamentB,amodeloftheentirehistoryofphilosophyasorganizedaroundtheparalleldevelopmentandself-articulationofthesetwophilosophicaltemperamentscarriesinitialplausibility.ItismostlytheextensionofthemodelintoModernPhilosophythatrequiresanelementof“creativity”onthetheory’spart.ButintruththecommonplacedivisionofModernphilosophersintorationalistsandempiricistsmapsrelativelyneatlyontoTemperamentsAandBaswell(henceJames’divisionofphilosophersintoRationalistloversofprinciplesandEmpiricistloversoffacts).MyownviewisthatthestandardclassificationofDescartesasarationalistissomethingofahistoriographicalblunder,butbracketingthecaseofDescartes,itisnothardtoappreciatehowSpinoza,Kant,and19th-centuryGermanandBritishIdealistspartakeinTemperamentA,orhowTemperamentBisexemplifiedbytheBritishEmpiricists,19th-centurycontinentalpositivistslikeAugusteComteandErnstMach,aswellasBrentanoandsomeofhisfollowers,notablythe“Polishlogiciansandnominalists,”asErnestNagelcalledtheminwhatisprobablythefirstself-conscioususeoftheexpression“analyticphilosophy”–Nagel’s1936paper“ImpressionsandAppraisalsofAnalyticPhilosophyinEurope.”

Withtheseremarksinplace,letmenowprovideasketchoftwoparallelstreamsinthehistoryofphilosophy,anA-andaB-stream.Iissueaseriesofcaveatsimmediatelythereafter.

• Plato• Speusippus,Xenocrates,andthe

OldAcademy• PhiloofAlexandria,Plutarch,and

theotherMiddlePlatonists• Seneca,Epictetus,andmostStoics

• Plotinus• Porphyry,Augustine,Boethius,

andotherNeoplatonists• Eriugena

• Anselm,Bonaventure

• MarsilioFicino,Cusanus,and

otherRenaissanceHumanists• Descartes,Spinoza,Leibniz• CudworthandtheCambridge

Platonists

• Aristotle• PeripateticsfromTheophrastus

throughAlexanderofAphrodisiastoAndronicus

• EpicureansfromEpicurustoLucretius

• Boethius

• Al-Farabi,Averroes,Maimonides,andlaterAverroists

• Aquinas,Ockham,andmostlateScholastics

• Suárez,FrancisBacon• Descartes• FromLockethroughHumeto

Mill:threecenturiesofBritish

Page 14: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

14

• Kant• Fichte,Schelling,Hegelandother

GermanaswellasBritishIdealists

• G.E.Moore,neo-Kantians

Empiricism• ComteandMach(early

positivism)• Brentanoandmostpartsofthe

BrentanoSchool• TheViennaCircleandQuine

Nowtothecaveats.First,notethatthetwostreamsarenotexclusive.IhaveincludedBoethiusandDescartesinboth,becauseeachseemstometohaveinitiatedphilosophicaldevelopmentsofthefirstsignificancewithinbothstreams.(Ibracketheremyreasonsforsayingthis;thepointisjustthatthereisnothinginherentlyproblematicinthenotionofsuchdualcontribution.)Secondly,mytwostreamsarenotexhaustiveeither:Iamnotsure,forinstance,whereifanywheretoplaceAmericanPragmatism,Husserl,orWittgenstein.(Theproblemmaybejustepistemic,insofarasmoresustainedanalysiswouldissueinsomerecommendation;buttheremayalsobenofactofthematteraboutsuchthings.)Thirdly,itisimportanttokeepinmind,inanycase,thatmostphilosophersfitneithercaricatureveryclosely,andIamassigningthemtoonestreamratherthananothermostlybecausetheyresembleonecaricaturemorethantheydotheother.Fourthly,obviouslythechoiceofwhotoincludeontheselistsreflectsacertainviewaboutwhotheimportantfiguresareineachera.HereIhavenotexercisedanypersonaljudgmentbuthavesimplyplacedcanonicalfiguresonthelist.Butaproperdevelopmentofatheoryofthehistoryofphilosophyshouldexercisejudgment.Finally,andmostimportantly,itisperfectlypossibletodisagreeabouttheproperclassificationofsomeofthesethinkers.Icanseethecase,forinstance,fordenyingBoethiusaplaceintheB-stream,oraccordingAl-FarabiasubsidiaryassignmentintheA-stream.However,toquarrelabouttheproperassignmentofthisorthatfigureinstreamAorBisnotitselftoquestiontheusefulnessoforganizingthehistoryofphilosophyalongthesetwostreams.Asatoolforimposingstructureonwhatisotherwiseabrutechronologyofphilosophy,thedivisionofthehistoryofphilosophyintodevelopmentsinTemperamentA’sself-articulationandTemperamentB’sself-articulationmayproveilluminating–thatis,itmayhelpusseerealorderandrealpatternsinthehistoryofphilosophy–evenifitisnotalwaysimmediatelyclearwhereanindividualphilosopherisbestplacedwithinthissuperstructure.

Isthereadirectiontothehistoryofphilosophy,ifthisishowwethinkofit?Therecertainlyneednotbe,andperhapsowingtomyownB-ishtemperament,Iamdisinclinedtothinkofhistory,philosophicalorotherwise,inteleologicalterms.(IamwithRankeandHerzenagainstHegelandMarxonthis!)Nonetheless,itis

Page 15: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

15

certainlypossibletoimaginetwonatural“restingpoints”forthehistoryofphilosophyasmodeledhere.Thefirstistheconvergenceonsomethingresemblinglong-termconsensusonwhatthestablestandmostultimafacieplausiblephilosophicalpackagedealsaretailoredtoA-typeantecedentsensibilitiesandB-typesensibilities.Thesecondisthefashioningofthestablestandmostultimafacieplausiblesynthesisofthetwooutlooks.

Asdulypromised,theaboveisalmostbanalasatheoryofthehistoryofphilosophy.Muchofitisgeneratedbystitchingtogethertwodividinglinesfamiliarfromstandardhistoriographyofphilosophy–thePlatonist/AristotelianlineforAncientandMedievalphilosophyandtherationalist/empiricistlineforModernphilosophy–toreconstructtwomoreorlesscontinuousstreamsofunfoldingphilosophicaldevelopments.Thedistinctiveclaimhereismostlyjustthattheunderlyingrationaleforthisorganizationhastodowithadichotomybetweentwoopposingphilosophicaltemperaments,namely,thosecaricaturedabove.

7.MechanicsofProgression

Givenanorganizationofthehistoryofphilosophyalongtwoparallelstreams,howarewetounderstandtheevolutionofideaswithineachstream?Mysuggestionisthatanindividualthinker’sphilosophicalideasaretheresultantsofthreeforces.Thefirstistheinfluenceofearlierthinkersofsimilartemperament.Thesecondiscounter-influence,sotospeak,bychallengesthethinkerperceivesasemergingfromtheopposingphilosophicaltemperament.Thethirdisthethinker’sownintellectualimpetus,impartingonhisorherworkthedistinctiveandunpredictablequalitythatmakesthehistoryofphilosophysucha“live”process.

Differentthinkerswillexhibitdifferentadmixturesofthesethreeforcesintheirphilosophical“output.”Onthewhole,weseemtodesignateaskeyfiguresinthehistoryofphilosophythosewetaketo(i)havealargerthanusualportionofpersonalimpetusintheformationoftheirideasand(ii)exercisealargerthanusualinfluenceand/orcounter-influenceonsubsequentthinkers.Philosopherswetaketoexhibit(i)butnot(ii),or(ii)butnot(i),tendtositonthecuspofourpantheon–theyareobjectsofintensescholarshipbutdonottypicallyshowupintheundergraduatecurriculum(Brentanomayfitthefirstprofile,Averroesthesecond).

Amongthephilosopherswetaketoexhibitboth(i)and(ii)–thatis,high-impetusphilosophersexercisingconsiderableinfluenceandcounter-influence–certainfurtherdistinctionsmaybemade.Inparticular,wemightdistinguishthree

Page 16: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

16

profiles:(a)thosethinkerswhoarethemselvessusceptibleprimarilytocounter-influence(e.g.,Kant,slumber-wokenasheisbyHume),(b)thosemoresusceptibletostraightforwardinfluence(e.g.,Aquinas,drawingprimarilyonAristotle),and(c)thoseappearingtoformtheirphilosophicalideasalmostentirelyfrominternalimpetus(Descartes?).Here,too,ofcourse,caricaturesareusefulinbringingoutmoresharplywhatinrealityaremuchblurrieraffairs.

WithintheframeworkIamproposing,ahistoryof(Western)philosophywouldtracethedevelopmentofideasasafunctionoftheforcesofinfluence,counter-influence,andimpetusswirlingineachstream,theAstreamoriginatinginPlatoandtheBstreamoriginatinginAristotle.Thosestreamsdevelopatsomeperiodsinrelativeisolationfromeachother,atothersthroughintensecross-fertilizationorevenpartialmerging,butmostofthetimesomewherein-between.Itisveryunusual,though,fordevelopmentsinonestreamtobecomprehensiblewithoutanyreferencetoprecedingandroughlycontemporaneousdevelopmentsintheother.Fullappreciationoftheoneisthuslikelytorequiresubstantialappreciationoftheother.Still,wemaylegitimatelyvieweachstreamasseekingprimarilyitsmostplausibleself-articulationgiventhechallengesposedbytheotherstream.

Whatkindofhistoricallaws,ifany,shouldweexpectinaparallel-streammodelofthehistoryofphilosophy?Wemighthopetofind,atasuitablelevelofdescriptiveabstraction,certainrecurringpatternsinthewayindividualphilosophersbuildonpredecessorstodevelopeverpurerembodimentsofonephilosophicaltemperament;herethemini-historiesofLateScholasticism,BritishEmpiricism,andGermanIdealismmightprovidefertilematerial.Ontheotherhand,wemightalsohopetodiscoverrecurringpatternsinthewayindividualphilosophersdevelopbreakthroughideasinreactiontochallengestheyperceivefromthinkersoftheopposingphilosophicaltemperament.HerewemightthinkparadigmaticallyofAristotle’sreactiontoPlato,Kant’sreactiontoHume,andthetworoughlysimultaneousandbroadly“analytic”reactionsto19th-centuryidealism:MooreandRussell’stoBritishIdealismandBrentano’stoGermanIdealism.Ifcertainabstractregularitiescanbefoundacrossthesecases,theymightserveasprimafaciehypothesesabouthistoricallaws.Thesewouldbeputativelawsofinfluenceandputativelawsofcounter-influence.Ipersonallysuspecttherearenotalso“lawsofimpetus”forustoseek:individuals’idiosyncraticintellectualimpetusispreciselywhatinjectsintothehistoryofphilosophyitscontingent,accidental,unpredictable(inaword:Dionysian)dimension.

Page 17: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

17

Inadditiontosuchlawsofinfluenceandcounter-influence,wealsohavethe“supremelaw”thatthehistoryofphilosophyprogressesintwoparallelstreams,inwhichthestablestandmostultimafacieplausiblephilosophicalpackagedealsaresoughtthatwouldarticulateTemperamentA’sandTemperamentB’santecedentsensibilities.ThisisourcounterparttoBrentano’slawthateacherainthehistoryofphilosophyischaracterizedbythesameprogressionthroughfourphases.Itiswhatcapturesthemostfundamentalstructurewearetryingtoimposeonthechronologyofphilosophy.

8.PeriodizationAgain

Iwanttoclosewithsomeremarksonhowperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophyshouldbeapproachedwithintheparallel-streamsframework.Butperhapsthemostimportantupshotoftheframeworkisthatweapproachthehistoryofphilosophywronglywhenwesliceit“horizontally,”alonghistoricalperiods,andexpectperiod-basedacademicspecialization.Wedothehistoryofphilosophygreaterjustice,infact,whenwesliceit“vertically,”alonglongitudinalsegmentsofthetwoparallelstreamsIhavesketched,andencouragespecializationintheevolutionofideasacrosstimewithineitherstream.Thiskindofhistorianofphilosophydoesexist:fortheA-stream,wehavetheworkofRaymondKlibansky,whopublishedonPlato,ProclusandotherNeoplatonists,thereceptionofPlatonicideasinByzantineandIslamicphilosophy,andthecontinuitythroughtheMiddleAgesallthewaytoCusanusintheRenaissance(see,e.g.,Klibansky1939);fortheB-stream,seenotablytheworkofHamidTaieb,whohaspublishedonB-typethinkersfromAristotleandAlexanderofAphrodisiasthoughAquinasandPeterAurioltoBrentanoandTwardowski,interalia(see,e.g.,Taieb2018).Buttheacademicnormisclearlyhorizontalratherthanverticalspecialization.Thismakesacertainamountofprofessionalsense.Verticalscholarshipobviouslyrequiresnon-triviallinguisticandhistoricalcompetencies.Still,asnoteditseemstometodogreaterjusticetotheinternallogicofthehistoryofphilosophy,andismorelikelytobringusneareracorrectunderstandingoftheoverallhistoryofphilosophy.

Thatsaid,itisanindependentlyinterestingquestionhowweshouldapproachtheperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophywithintheparallel-streamsframework.Heretwo(entirelycompatible)periodizationprojectssuggestthemselvestome.

Thefirstprojectistosegmenteachstreamseparatelyintoitsowndistinctiveperiods.WhataretheturningpointsinTemperamentA’sphilosophicalself-

Page 18: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

18

articulation,andwhatinTemperamentB’s?ForA,wemightforinstancedesignatePlatotoPlotinusasthefirstera,PlotinustoKantasthesecondera,andpost-KantianA-typephilosophyastheerawearestillin;andforB,wemighttakeAristotletoAquinasasthefirstera,AquinastoBaconasthesecondera,thehalf-millenniumofpredominantlyAnglophoneempiricismandpositivismbetweenBaconandQuineasathirdera,andpost-QuineanB-typephilosophyasafourtheranowinitsinfancy(seeTable3).Iamproposingthisperiodizationmostlyforthesakeofillustration.Butthereareseveralgeneralpointsitservestoillustrate.Firstofall,thephilosophicalperiodizationneednotalignwiththeSchlözer-styleperiodizationofWesternhistoryintoAncient,Medieval,andModern.Secondly,theperiodizationsoftheAstreamandBstreamneednotalignwitheachother;infact,thereislittlereasontoexpectthemto.Thirdly,periodscanvarygreatlyintheirlength–thereisnoreasontoexpectneatroughlymillennium-longperiodsinthehistoryofphilosophy.Andfourthly,wemayfindthatonestreamnaturallysegmentsmorefine-grainedlythantheother;again,thereisnoapriorireasontoexpectanythingelse.

• Plato

• Plotinus

• Kant

• Aristotle

• Aquinas• Bacon

• Quine

Table3.APossibleTwo-StreamPeriodizationoftheHistoryofPhilosophy

Asecondperiodizationprojectwithintheparallel-streamsframeworkwould

seektosegmenttheoverallhistoryof(Western)philosophybytherelativelong-termdominanceofTemperamentAorTemperamentBinthephilosophicallandscape.Threetypesofpossibleperiodsmightbedistinguished:whenTemperamentAisdominant,whenTemperamentBisdominant,andwhenneitherdominates.Thus,wemightdesignatetheperiodbetweenPlatoandPlotinusasafirsteraofno-dominance;theperiodbetweenPlotinusandAverroes/Aquinasasasecondera,dominatedbyTemperamentA;theperiodfromAquinastoSpinozaas

Page 19: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

19

dominatedbytheBtemperament;andthereafterafourthperiodofrenewedno-dominance.

• Plato/Aristotle

• Plotinus

• Aquinas

• Spinoza

Nodominance

A-dominance

B-dominance

Nodominance

Table4.APossibleSinglePeriodization

Iclosewithfourgeneralnotesonthesetwoperiodizationprojects.First,

bothprojectsinvitesub-periodizationsaswell.Thus,evenifthecurrent,fourthstageinoursingleoverallperiodizationischaracterizedbyno-dominance,itmightseemnaturaltoviewthehalfcenturyfromDescartestoLockeasA-accented,thefollowingcentury–fromLocketoKant–asB-accented,andthefollowingcenturyasA-accentedagain.Itisjustwithacoarser-grainedlookthatweseethelargerperiodasmorebalanced.

Second,ifwestartourtwohistoricalstreamswithPlatoandAristotle,weareeffectivelyconfiningSocratesandhispredecessorstothepre-historyofphilosophy,somewhatasSchlözersentpre-RomanhumanityintotheDunkleofpre-history.Thisseemstomeintruthquitejustified,ifonlybecausewehaveessentiallynowrittenmaterialfromthesethinkers,onlyquotationsandtestimoniesbyothers(muchofwhatweknowaboutthepre-SocraticscomesoriginallyfromAristotleandTheophrastus,andalmosteverythingweknowaboutSocrates’philosophycomesfromPlato).

Third,asnotedIdonotexpecttheretobetheory-independentfactsofthematterthatrationallycompelustoacceptonepossibleperiodizationoverallothers.Theideaof‘naturaljoints’inthehistoryofphilosophy,whichitisthehistorian’saimtocorrectlyidentify,haslittlepurchaseonusaswesurveythemassofphilosophicalworksthatconstitutethehistoryofphilosophy.Thisraisesdifficult

Page 20: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

20

methodologicalquestionsaroundtheevaluationofproposedperiodizations,andraisesthespecterofpossiblecohabitationofseveralofperiodizationsco-acceptedinparallel.Ibracketthesequestionshere,sinceanywayIamfloatingtheperiodizationsinTables3and4mostlyforillustrativepurposes.

Fourth,therewillbeatemptationforcontemporaryphilosopherstoaskhowcertainlivingphilosophicalgiants–say,SaulKripkeorKitFine–mightfitintothevariousschemesIhaveputforwardhere.Suchquestionsarefuntoplaywith,butintruthIthinkweshouldresistthetemptationtospeculateonthehistoricalsignificanceoftheKripkesandFinesoftheworld,aswesimplylackthedistancetoevaluatetheirinfluenceandcounter-influenceontheevolutionofphilosophicalideasonthetimescalesrelevanttoahistoryofphilosophy.Thispointextendstorecentlydeceasedgiants(say,DavidLewis)aswell.Althoughthisisoftennotthecasetoday,traditionallyacademicsinhistorydepartmenthaveworkedwithamovingwallofhalfacenturytoacenturywhenitcomestodefiningwhatishistory.ThisperfectlyreasonableruleofthumbwouldrecommendsilencefornowonthehistoricalplaceofthelikesofLewis,Kripke,andFine.

8.Conclusion,withCodaonNon-WesternPhilosophy

Inaway,mymainaiminthispaperhasbeentoinviteamorecriticalapproachtothebranchofphilosophywecallhistoryofphilosophy:morecriticalbothregardingitsofficialaimsandregardingsomeofitsdeepest,mostinstitutionalizedassumptions,notablyaroundperiodization.Ihavefloatedanexpandedagendaforthehistoriographyofphilosophythatincludesmoreglobalconcernswiththeoverallstructureofthehistoryofphilosophy,andhavealsorecommendedamorephilosophicallybasedapproachestotheperiodizationofthehistoryofphilosophy.

Inamorespeculativevein,Ihavealsosketchedfirst-orderproposalsregardingboththeoverallstructureofthehistoryofphilosophy(i.e.,intermsoftheparalleldevelopmentsoftwoopposingphilosophicaltemperaments’searchfortheirbestarticulation)andfruitfulperiodizationsinlightofthatbasicstructure(i.e.,theonescapturedinTables3and4).

Invariousplaces,Ihaveindicatedparentheticallythatmysubjectmatterisrestrictedto“Western”philosophy,whichdesignationtypicallycoversEuropeancivilizationanditsModernextensionintheAmericas.Butintruthgeographyhaslittletodowithoursubjectmatter.Anythinkerwhoseworkhasthesameaimaswhatwecallphilosophy,andwhoexemplifiestoanextentTemperamentAorB,

Page 21: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

21

wouldbelongtothehistoryofphilosophyasconceivedhere.ThisappliesobviouslytosuchfiguresasIamblicustheSyrianNeoplatonist,AvicennathePersianAristotelian,andAmotheAfricanCartesian.ButitmayperfectlywellapplytothinkerswhodidnotengagethephilosophicaltraditionoftheWestatall,solongasthesethinkers’intellectualconcernsandaimsoverlapsufficientlywiththoseofthefiguresmentionedabove,especiallyiftheirpursuitoftheseaimsmanifestselementsofTemperamentAand/orB.Fromthisperspective,thereisabsolutelynoreasonnottoinclude,say,the6th/7th-centuryIndianphilosopherDharmakīrtiinourB-stream,givenhisapparentnominalismandempiricism.

Itisanopenquestion,ofcourse,justwhattheproprietaryaimofphilosophyexactlyis.Differentpeoplewillhavedifferentviewsonthis(seemy“PhilosophyasTotalAxiomatics”formyownviews).Butwhateverone’sview,itshouldmakeitpossibleforahistoricalfigureentirelyinsulatedfromtheEuropeanphilosophicaltraditiontoshowupinthesamehistoryofphilosophy.Suchafigurewouldnot,ofcourse,participateinthesamecausalwebofinfluenceandcounter-influence.Dharmakīrti’snominalismwasnotinfluencedbyBoethius’anddidnotinfluenceOckham’s.Buttheymayyetparticipateinaseparateweb(DharmakīrtiisahighlyinfluentialfigureinIndianphilosophy,andwashimselfstronglyinfluencedbyDignāga),andanywaysufficientlybizarrecircumstancescouldleadsomeEuropeanthinker,too,tobecausallyinsulatedinthisway.Fromthisperspectivethereisnoreasonwhynon-Westernthinkerscouldnotbeplacedwithinasingleglobalhistoryofphilosophy.

Atthesametime,presumablysomeintellectualpursuits,includingonesnolessvaluablethanphilosophy,wouldnotqualifyasphilosophicalonanyminimallysubstantivecharacterizationofphilosophy’sdistinctiveintellectualaims.Andsomeofthesepursuitscouldbelabeled“philosophy”despitetheirdissimilaritytothepursuitsharedbythethinkerswehavementionedhere.Inthatcase,allsidesmaybegenerousinallowingeverybodytousethelabel,butitwouldbeusefultokeepinmindthefactthatdifferentthingsarebeingtalkedabout.Almosthalfacenturyagonow,KwasiWireduarguedthatmuchofwhatisdiscussedunderthebannerofAfricanPhilosophyisinfactnotphilosophyatall:oftenthegambitistodrawoutbroadlyphilosophicalorcosmologicalpropositionsimplicitincollectivemythsandoraltraditionsspecifictoAfricanethnicities,whereasphilosophicalreflectionischaracterizedpreciselybytherigorousandanalyticmakingexplicitofideasofsomeuniversalimport.OfcourseWireduallowsforthepossibilityofAfricanphilosophyinthesensepertinenttoushere,butforhimitissimplygoodold-fashionedphilosophythathappenstobedonebyAfricans.Compare:whenwespeakofEuropeanarchitectureversusAsianarchitecture,wehaveinmindasignificant

Page 22: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

22

distinctionbetweentwokindsofarchitecture;butwhenwespeakofEuropeantomatoesandAsiantomatoes,weassumethattomatoesaretomatoesaretomatoesandwearesimplykeepingtrack,forwhateverreason,ofwheresomeofthemcomefrom.Thehistoryof“Western”philosophyismorelikeahistoryofWesterntomatoesthanahistoryofWesternarchitecture.

Thepoint–thepointIamadoptingherefromWiredu,thatis–isthat,atbottom,philosophyisone–evenifitisinteresting,forwhateverreason,tokeeptrackofwhereintheworldthatonethingisdone.Again,wedonotobjecttothepolysemoususeof“philosophy”todesignateotherintellectualpursuits.Weonlyinsistthat,inthesenseinwhichtheterm“philosophy”isusedhere,thereisnomeaningfuldistinctionbetweenthehistoryofWesternphilosophyandhistoriesofnon-Westernphilosophies.Sincephilosophyisone,thehistoryofphilosophyisalsoone.1

WorksReferenced

§ Adamson,P.2014.ClassicalPhilosophy.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

§ Adamson,P.2015.PhilosophyintheHellenisticandRomanWorlds.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

§ Adamson,P.2016.PhilosophyintheIslamicWorld.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

§ Adamson,P.2019.MedievalPhilosophy.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

§ Aristotle.DeAnima.Googleit.

§ Aristotle.Metaphysics.Googleit.

§ Boethius524.TheConsolationofPhilosophy.Trans.P.G.Walsh.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1999.

§ Brentano,F.1895.‘TheFourPhasesofPhilosophyandItsCurrentState.’Trans.B.M.MezeiandB.Smith.IntheirTheFourPhasesofPhilosophy.Amsterdam:Rodopi,1998.

§ Comte,A.1830-42.Coursdephilosophiepositive.Paris:Rouen.

§ Gilson,E.1939.‘FranzBrentano’sInterpretationofMediaevalPhilosophy.’MediaevalStudies1:1-10.

§ Hegel,G.W.F.1837.LecturesonthePhilosophyofHistory.Trans.J.Sibree.London:G.BellandSons,1902.

1Forcommentsonapreviousdraft,IamgratefultoPeterAdamsonandMauriceKriegel.

Page 23: sketch for a theory of the history of philosophyWhat I want to highlight at this point is only that a chronology of philosophy is the starting point for any history of philosophy.

23

§ James,W.1907.Pragmatism:ANewNameforSomeOldWaysofThinking.NewYork:Longmans,Green,&Co.

§ Klibansky,R.1939.TheContinuityofthePlatonicTraditionDuringtheMiddleAges.London:TheWarburgInstitute.

§ Kriegel,U.2016.‘PhilosophyasTotalAxiomatics:SeriousMetaphysics,ScrutabilityBases,andAestheticEvaluation.’JournaloftheAmericanPhilosophicalAssociation2:272-290.

§ Marx,K.andF.Engels1846.TheGermanIdeology.Trans.W.Lough,C.Dutt,andC.P.Magill.NewYork:InternationalPublishers,1970.

§ Nagel,E.1936.‘ImpressionsandAppraisalsofAnalyticPhilosophyinEurope.’JournalofPhilosophy33:5-24.

§ Pasnau,R.2011.MetaphysicalThemes:1274-1671.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

§ Pinkard,T.2002.GermanPhilosophy1760-1860:TheLegacyofIdealism.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

§ Plato.Phaedo.Googleit.

§ vonSchlözer,A.L.1772.VorstellungseinerUniversal-Historie.Göttinger:Dieterich.

§ Soames,S.2014.TheAnalyticTraditioninPhilosophy,Vol.1:TheFoundingGiants.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

§ Soames,S.2017.TheAnalyticTraditioninPhilosophy,Vol.2:ANewVision.Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

§ Taieb,H.2018.RelationalIntentionality:BrentanoandtheAristotelianTradition.Cham:Springer.