ANALYTIC VS CONTINENTAL AND ABRAHAMIC IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT Analytic philosophy

ANALYTIC VS CONTINENTAL AND ABRAHAMIC IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT

Analytic philosophy struggles to speak (testify) in measurements each of which is testable. An attempt to limit error and deceit. Because analytic philosophy rose out of the anglo system (empirical) which arose out of the anglo legal (bacon).

The consequence is that by deflation (opposite of the continental method) truth can be tested by the ‘market’ for those with a wide set of norms, traditions, and values.

The advantage (and purpose) of the continental (and abrahamic) models, is to conflate rather than deflate measurements with values such that one must submit to sympathy (consent to the values) in order to test the measure (if possible).

In other words, the purpose of the analytic model is deflationary to prevent the very suggestion and monopoly of values that continental tradition seeks to enforce, and to prevent the suggestion and monopoly of facts and values that religions seek to enforce.

In other words, the analytic tradition seeks to insulate us from the sympathetic coercion of the continental program of philosophy, and the authoritarian deception of the abrahamic program of philosophy.

The problem then is the same as faced by the ancients. One must retain correspondence and coherence between one’s method of pedagogy(group evolutionary strategy) and method of law (dispute resolution). The roman’s mistake was in tolerating the introduction of deception into the empire in the jewish, christian, and islamic forms. As well as tolerating the retention of Greek idealism. They had solved the problem of roman law, stoic ritual and virtue, and public religion and festival.

The germans have conflated religion and philosophy while preserving the deflation of law – although not as strongly as the common law prior to Napoleon.

And I have learned a great deal from the difference between the anglo method and the german and the jewish.

The more deflation the more innovation and adaptation and trust. The problem is, one must increase the prosecution of recidivism in one’s religion and education along with every increase in deflation of philosophy and law.

This explains most of history really as a battle between underclass deceit and conflation against the aristocracy and aristocratic truth and deflation against the underclass.

Or more simply, aristocratic eugenics vs underclass dysgenics.