Abstract

In 2007, a debate took place between Hungarian representatives of the analytic and continental schools of philosophy. Boldizsár Eszes and János T?zsér concluded their article about the history of analytic philosophy by the claim that the only possible method of philosophising is analytic. Answering on behalf of continental philosophers, Tibor Schwendtner approached the topic from the points of view of the sociology of knowledge and academic politics. Tamás Ullmann also defended continental philosophy, emphasizing that it is not vague or unscientific. István Faragó-Szabó, in opposition to the continental position, represented a third, independent point of view. In their answer to Scwendtner, Eszes and T?zsér reject his charges, providing extensive evidence against them