What is analytic philosophy, and why is it important to ask?

Abstract

In this paper I discuss the nature and origins of analytic philosophy. I criticize a few recent papers on this topic, published by Vladimir Shokhin and Vitalii Tselishchev. I also consider a book of Aaron Preston, Analytic Philosophy: The History of Illusion, as both Shokhin and Tselishchev discuss his ideas. I criticize Tselishchev’s ad hominem critique of Shokhin’s “revisionism”, by which he expands the historical boundaries of analytic philosophy to the very beginnings of philosophy. I argue, however, that Shokhin’s version of such revisionism is flawed, because his position presupposes that “analytic philosophy” is a description, not a name, but that seems not to be the case. I recommend another view, according to which the contemporary analytic philosophy is an heir of classical and modern philosophy. In this paper I also clarify some points concerning the early “linguistic” period of analytic philosophy and origins of the very term “analytic philosophy”, which I trace back to the 18^th century. At the end of the paper I provide some data confirming a “classical turn” of the recent analytic philosophy and consider some practical consequences of my conclusions for Russian philosophical education. I believe we should pay much more attention to analytic thought.