First, you pose a false dichotomy. The cultural origin of ideas from any school of thought, whether Asian, African, or European schools of thought has <i>absolutely no bearing</i> on whether they are true.<p>All Universities should seek to teach the truth. Therefor, the cultural backgrounds of the author is irrelevant, except to the extent it forms a background to understand the author&#x27;s ideas.<p>Also, we already call it &quot;Continental Philosophy&quot; as opposed to &quot;Analytical Philosophy.&quot; If she wants to call it &quot;European Continental Philosophy,&quot; who cares?<p>It&#x27;s flatly wrong, since as she rightly points out, Arab and Asian philosophy have had profound influences on Western thinkers throughout history.<p>Also, has she not taken a philosophy course lately? Aristotle through Kant is pretty much considered a given, or go back to the survey level. Every one of the concepts she mentioned will be in any survey course of global philosophy, as simply as if she plucked them from such a syllabus.<p>People really pushing the limits are digging deeply into the Muslim Great Age, in particular Ibn Khaldun and his school of thought (since the great works of Ancient Greece came back to Europe through their preservation in Muslim libraries and schools), or off attempting to create a precise definition of &quot;utility.&quot;<p>Finally, I hate this type of nonsense PC battle about names.<p>It distracts from real honest to God issues of economic and social diversity: an overhaul of the unequal justice system, an end to police brutality, restrictions on the use and duration of criminal records, redistribution of capital from the the top 1%, equal pay for equal work, and immigration reform all come to mind.