Philosophers debate the death of philosophy as much as they debate the death of God. Kant claimed responsibility for both philosophy's beginning and end, while Heidegger argued it concluded with Nietzsche. In the twentieth century, figures as diverse as John Austin and Richard Rorty have proclaimed philosophy's end, with some even calling for the advent of "postphilosophy." In an effort to make sense of these conflicting positions--which often say as much about the philosopher as his subject--Isabelle Thomas-Fogiel undertakes the first systematic treatment of "the end of philosophy," while also recasting the history of western thought itself.

Thomas-Fogiel begins with postphilosophical claims such as scientism, which she reveals to be self-refuting, for they subsume philosophy into the branches of the natural sciences. She discovers similar issues in Rorty's skepticism and strands of continental thought. Revisiting the work of late-nineteenth and early-twentieth-century philosophers, when the split between analytical and continental philosophy began, Thomas-Fogiel finds both traditions followed the same path--the road of reference--which ultimately led to self-contradiction. This phenomenon, whether valorized or condemned, has been understood as the death of philosophy. Tracing this pattern from Quine to Rorty, from Heidegger to Levinas and Habermas, Thomas-Fogiel reveals the self-contradiction at the core of their claims while also carving an alternative path through self-reference. Trained under the French philosopher Bernard Bourgeois, she remakes philosophy in exciting new ways for the twenty-first century.

Analyser l'actuel theme de la fin de la philosophie pour mieux le mettre en cause puis en perspective, tel est l'objectif de ce livre. Analyser tout d'abord, en deployant le motif de la mort de la philosophie dans la diversite de ses variations actuelles (post-analytique, phenomenologique, etc.). Remettre en cause ensuite, en proposant une conception de la signification philosophique qui depasse les paradoxes de l'enonciation inherents aux positions envisagees. Mettre en perspective enfin, en retournant a la source historique de ces paradoxes, a la racine commune aux paradigmes les plus opposes, a savoir une pareille course a la reference au detriment d'une theorie minimale de l'autoreference. Il s'agit donc de proposer un modele pour aller vers la fin de la fin de la philosophie, c'est-a-dire vers la vie toujours recommencee.