Family has always occupied a miserable position in the history of philosophy. In literature, Tolstoy gave it a detailed and dynamic portrait in Anna Karenina, and of course Joyce's last work, Finnegans Wake, is one big chaos based on the story of a family -- the Earwickers. Philosophers, on the other hand, neither analyze nor raise families. It is a famous fact that Rousseau, the writer of one of the most detailed treatise on education, failed to even commit to a son whom he secretly had to abandon, and one of the few truthful things which Nietzsche wrote was that the best philosophers are almost always unmarried. And even married philosophers, such as Jacques Derrida, are fond of recalling how their entry to philosophy was coupled with a fierce rejection of the family -- "families, I hate you!" was one of Derrida's mottos during his adolescent years.
Family is not permitted to enter philosophical discourse. Philosophy is not addressed to a family, and the notion of family is also scarcely given direct attention. Hegel returns to this notion once in a while, but only in the context of Antigone. Perhaps a re-reading of Hegel will, however, give us something to consider when analyzing the philosophical notion of family.
On the other hand, philosophy also suffers by the hands of the family. In the familiar context, philosophy loses its edge, and turns into a domesticated discourse. It cloaks the appearance of a universal, profound truth, but at bottom its "truth" is only warranted by the emotional bond between the family members, the speaker and the listener. As such it is highly contingent, yet the family tie prevents either person to take a distance from what is going on.
Here, then, is a contradiction which seems irresolvable: a family cannot be discussed philosophically, and philosophy cannot grow within a family. As a consequence, the philosophical idea of a family seems to have to stand outside the experience of the family, and its presentation would not be addressed to a family. And a person remaining within the bounds of familiar emotional ties will also be denied access to any kind of rigorous philosophy.
I nonetheless dream of a philosophical idea of a family which is both formulated from within the experience of the family and in a language which is addressed to a family member. Such an account will be philosophical yet at the same time catered towards the family, thus giving a family member the chance to access philosophy from precisely that position. But would such an account have to shamelessly circumvent the traditional language of philosophy? Perhaps. It will definitely have to take a new, different tone, with a new lexicon and a new logic. How much of this new mode of speech can incorporate tradition remains to be seen.
At the moment, the articulation of the idea of a family remains merely a plan and a project.
