Conclusion

David Egan
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"David Egan","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198832638.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both Wittgenstein and Heidegger have been associated with the idea of an ‘end of philosophy’: their work is sometimes read as representing a fundamental rupture in the philosophical tradition, such that the discipline formerly known as ‘philosophy’ can no longer continue as before in the wake of their intervention—and this is a reading they sometimes encourage....","PeriodicalId":169632,"journal":{"name":"The Pursuit of an Authentic Philosophy","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Pursuit of an Authentic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198832638.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both Wittgenstein and Heidegger have been associated with the idea of an ‘end of philosophy’: their work is sometimes read as representing a fundamental rupture in the philosophical tradition, such that the discipline formerly known as ‘philosophy’ can no longer continue as before in the wake of their intervention—and this is a reading they sometimes encourage....
结论
维特根斯坦和海德格尔都与“哲学的终结”的观念联系在一起:他们的工作有时被解读为代表了哲学传统的根本断裂,这样,在他们的干预之后,以前被称为“哲学”的学科就不能再像以前那样继续下去了——这是他们有时鼓励的一种解读....
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信