Simon Critchley著、江怡译《解读欧陆哲学》（Continental Philosophy）：

在科学主导的世界，哲学变成了认识论，用来探究科学成为可能条件，成为科学的清道夫。

In a science-dominated world, what roledoes our professional philosopher assign to philosophy? This can in part beanswered by recalling the Greek word for knowedge, episteme. Philosophy becomesepistemology, the theory of knowledge. That is, it is overwhelmingly concernedwith logical and methological questions as to how we know whtat we know, and invirtue of what shch knowledge is valid. Philosophy becomes a theorethcalenquiry into the conditions under which scientific knowledge is possible. Inthe scientific conception the world, the role of philosophy moves from being,as it was for Plato, the queen of the sciences, where theoretical knowledge wasunified with practical wisdom. It becomes rather, in John Locke’s formula atthe beginning of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding in 1689, anunder-labourer to science, whose job is to clear away the rubbish that lies inthe way to knowledge and scientific progress. Philosophers become janitors inthe Crystal Palace of the sciences.

但科学的世界观彻底排除了寻求生命意义问题答案的需求吗？没有。科学的世界观非但没有弥合知识与智慧之间的鸿沟，反而使我们更为明显地感觉到这个鸿沟。

The question is: does the scienfific conceptionof the world eradicate the need for an answer to the question of the meaning folife?

The paradox is that the scientificconception of the world does not close the gap between knowledge and wisdom,but makes us feel it all the more acutely.

It is when the force of this paradox beginsto be felt existentially that the neglected question of the meaning of lifercomes back with a real and frightening vengeance: “I seem to have everything Ineed and want, but what is the point of my life?”

如果理性可以批判一切事物，那么，它也一定可以批判自身（元批判）。正如弗雷德里克。贝瑟尔所说：“噩梦出现了：对理性的自我批判以虚无主义——即怀疑一切事物的存在——告终。这种恐惧就是启蒙运动的危机的主要内容。”

But if that is true – if reason cancriticize all things – then surely it mus also criticize itself(meta-critique). As Frederick Beiser remarks, “A nightmare loom: that theself-criticism of reason ends in nihilism, doubt about the existence ofeverything. That fear was the sum and substance of the crisis of the Aufklarung”.

分析哲学与欧陆哲学之间的大部分差异，都可以简单地回到如何阅读康德以及阅读了多少康德这些问题上。

Much of the difference between analytic andContinental philosophy simply turns on how one reads Kant and how much Kant onereads.

虚无主义概念可以区分分析哲学与欧陆哲学。

穆勒认为，边沁对古代的理论或众多周知的看法就是质疑：“它是真的吗？”而柯尔律治询问的是，“它的意义是什么？”所以，欧陆哲学关心的是意义，而与之相反的边沁主义（英国哲学或分析哲学传统）则关心真理。

分析哲学与欧陆哲学是思维习惯的分野，前者为经验的-科学的思维习惯，后者为阐释的-浪漫的思维习惯。

欧陆传统中的哲学点金石就是实践问题。对于欧陆传统中的大多数哲学家来说，哲学是一种批判现实的手段，是为了推进对处于危机中的现实的反思意识，无论这是被表达为低俗的平庸世界中的信仰危机（克尔恺郭尔），还是欧洲自然哲学危机（胡塞尔）或者人文科学的危机（福柯）、虚无主义的危机（尼采）、遗忘存在的危机（海德格尔）、小资产阶级资本主义社会的危机（马克思）、工具理性霸权和对自然支配的危机（阿多诺和霍克海默），或者是其他的什么危机。哲学作为对历史、文化和社会的敏锐反思，带来的是批判意识的觉醒，胡塞尔称之为已积淀的传统的复活。

For much of the Continental tradition,philosophy is a means to criticize the present, to promote a reflectiveawareness of the present as being in crisis, whether this is expressed as acrisis of faith in a bourgeois-philistine world (in Kierkegaard), a crisis ofthe European sciences (in Husserl), of the human sciences (in Foucault), ofnihilism (in Nietzsche), of the forgetfulness of Being (in Heidegger), ofbourgeois-acpitalist society (in Marx), of the hegemony of instrumentalrationality and the domination of nature (in Adorno and Max Horkheimer), orwhater. Philosophy as an acute reflection upon history, culture, and societyleads to the awakening of critical consciousness, what Husserl would call thereactivation of a sedimented tradition.