Critchley was exceptional in explaining the difference between the Analytical and Cntinental; at least for myself, although I know my grasp on the subtleties is not absolute. The first chapter helped to illuminate the gap between the two islands; Analytical tends to adopt scientism and Continental adopts obscurantism. Slightly confused on what obscurantism means, my best leap would be to say that Continental philosophy relies on and offers reasoning that is unable to be pinned to one location so that scientists may probe at it with their methods. Or that it never completely answers a question (according to Analytical). This sort of gap has created two sides of the same class room with literary intellects on the right side and scientists on the left side leaving an awkward expanse of empty space between. I was supprised to find out is that at least one university, Sydney, had seperated the two branches of philosophy.