Does Philosophy Need to Know Its History?

Does philosophy need to study its own history? Yes, but for nonhistoricist reasons. Regardless of when, where, and why they were written; what texts influenced them; and what influence they subsequently exerted, some works of the past have enduring value that transcends the particulars of their time and place. They are, to use an unfashionable word, “great.” Introduction introduces this thesis by considering Leo Strauss’s arguments against historicism and his conception of a nonhistoricist reading of the history of philosophy. Using Aristotle as an exemplar, Poetry Is More Philosophical Than History and Epistemic Access to Nonhistorical Universals elaborate on what this might mean. A Great Book builds on their results in order to examine the notion of a “great book,” a phrase that only makes sense if nonhistoricist thought is deemed possible.