ABSTRACT
It would be possible and perhaps predictable for a philosopher to deal with this topic in the current analytical manner. A careful analysis could be made, one by one, of the rag-bag of disciplines that are grouped together under the title 'the humanities' in respect of the possibility of shared concepts, of truth-criteria and of agreement in judgments within them. The problems inherent in the suggestion that literary criticism is a form of knowledge (with all that implies, epistemologically speaking) could be explored; question marks could be placed against the status of theology; the claims for rigour and precision in Sherrington's work in physiology could be put alongside what might be claimed for that of Freud, Piaget, or Chomsky in psychology proper. Notorious problems about contemporary biases in interpreting history could be carefully laid out. This is perhaps what would be expected of a philosopher. But to do such a job properly would require a whole volume.
