Our Age of Philosophy
Philosophy has found itself in a peculiar predicament for some time now. On the one hand, there is a persistent rhetoric regarding its impracticality in the job market, with an overwhelming consensus that a degree in philosophy does not equip one with the skills necessary to secure a career directly related to the discipline—or, indeed, any career at all. This sentiment is reflected in the ongoing decline of philosophy and other humanities departments, which are either being shut down or absorbed into more successful academic fields. At the same time, the traditional roles of philosophy—intellectual pursuit, critique, and the exploration of human knowledge and existence—are increasingly being supplanted by more lucrative and scientific endeavours, such as neuroscience, which claims to offer empirical and precise solutions to questions once reserved for philosophical inquiry.
On the other hand, philosophy—particularly Continental Philosophy—seems to be more influential and powerful now than it has been in recent decades. The so-called ongoing culture wars, in the U.S. and in Europe, centred around radical understandings of gender, post-colonial thought, and identity politics, are deeply rooted in ideas that emerged from philosophy departments in the wake of the “May '68 generation.” Thinkers such as Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Luce Irigaray, Jacques Lacan, and others, often classified as continental philosophers, have profoundly shaped these debates.
They generally hold that philosophical questions concerning human thought and existence are not timeless but historical. Human thinking itself is not necessary and universal, but contigent, singular, and above all, susceptible to the passage of time. In simple terms, as humanity changes, so too must philosophy, and we cannot continue to ask the same questions that were posed millennia ago, such as "What is truth?" or "What is man?", if we wish to gain a better understanding of ourselves as a changing species.
This approach, central to Continental Philosophy, resonates powerfully with divergent groups today. For example, on one side, the so-called "woke" movement advocates for minority rights by uncovering and challenging a history of oppression that must be viewed as problematic rather than as a story of progress. On the other side, hyper-conservative forces in the U.S. experience a moral panic over the inclusion of Critical Race Theory in education, which examines American history, economics, and politics through the lens of systemic racism and power-relations. This dynamic underscores the far-reaching impact of Continental Philosophy ideas in contemporary debates across the political spectrum.
Beyond its intrinsic power to influence through powerful, shapeshifting ideas, philosophy is also becoming more pallatable in the marketplace. Increasingly, one hears of billionaires and business leaders advocating for the study of philosophy over technology, based on the belief that as technology—particularly AI—advances, many technical skills will become obsolete. However, at present, this trend remains more of a pseudo-intellectual buzz than a concept with tangible application in the actual market. Nevertheless, in this context, it reflects a growing recognition of the need to distinguish human creativity from machine thinking and to identify problems that machines cannot solve independently.
In these type of discussions, it is “classical” philosophy, particularly Analytical Philosophy, that is often invoked as the way forward. Analytical Philosophy is characterized by its emphasis on clarity, logic, and rigorous argumentation. It focuses on precision in language and the analysis of concepts, often steering clear of the more radical, transformative aims of Continental Philosophy. This makes it particularly attractive to the market, as it provides a framework for critical thinking and problem-solving without challenging the existing social and economic structures. Analytical Philosophy's methodical approach to questions of ethics, reasoning, and the nature of knowledge can be easily integrated into the decision-making processes of businesses, helping to navigate complex issues in a way that aligns with market interests. Nevertheless, even within this more market-friendly framework, philosophy remains a crucial touchstone for distinguishing human from non-human intellectual activity.
In this Substack we uncover what remains of philosophy once we strip away the distortions caused by its current (mis)uses - whether as a tool for political agendas or as a servant of the market. By doing so, we aim to reveal a positive potential of philosophy. Continental and critical philosophy can compel us to engage with the world in a way that restores our faith in it, without succumbing to naivety or ignoring the often harsh and even cruel realities that thinking entails.
Philosophy confronts us with the uncomfortable truth that, while we are certainly capable of thinking, we are not truly engaging in it. More than that, we often resist the kind of thinking we idealize—a creative act that generates genuinely new ideas. What do we really want? We seek repetition, replication, sequels, and remakes, holding fast to what has worked in the past (consider the well-known algorithms that suggest your next show to watch or product to buy based on your past choices). Our obsession with proper and adequate representation—whether in politics (who can legitimately represent a constituency in parliament?), in the arts (who is permitted to portray on screen a person from a minority background?), or in business (who and what represents a diverse and inclusive work environment?)—suggests that we are more invested in reinforcing existing ideas than in generating new ones. More on this next week.