Across the western academic landscape, philosophy has become largely canonised and standardised. Historically, however, even what is canonically called “philosophy” has never been as homogeneous
Across the western academic landscape, philosophy has become largely canonised and standardised. Historically, however, even what is canonically called “philosophy” has never been as homogeneous as it may appear through the best-of lens of contemporary anthologies and curricula. In fact, even philosophy in a narrow definition is much more diverse than the typical pantheon of (more or less) bearded marble men might suggest – as far as forms, methods and subjects are concerned, variety has always been immense.
Recently, more and more philosophers working within (if often at the margins of) academia have been trying to criticise the overpowering effects of the canon and to enter into conversations with forms and methods of thinking that extend well beyond their own backgrounds and traditions. On the one hand, such an effort is often linked to more general projects that demand equal access and representation (social, feminist, decolonial, etc.); on the other hand, however, it can also be framed in terms of a renewal of philosophical curiosity as well as rigour beyond the nearsighted narcissism that continues to limit its appeal.
In this conversation with Nadja Germann and Michael Marder, we’ll explore what the continuous metamorphosis of forms of thinking and expression does to the ideas that are like snapshots in a process. Philosophy comes to be regarded as a polylogic/al praxis that is not limited to the word, whether spoken or on the page or screen, traversing extended minds and media.