The paper is devoted to the problem of difference without distinction between the analytical and continental philosophies which cannot be formulated at the level of certain metaphilosophy but remains absolutely real and sufficiently perceptible at the level of the method used by philosophers in studying philosophy. Being far from the position of ecumenism and the idea of overcoming the distinctions of two traditions in post-analytical philosophy, the author emphasizes that, in spite of the divergences in education, style and interests which tend, to a more or less extent, to the history of philosophy, one gains an impression that the question is in two different disciplines which difference is reduced to the variation in the rules of the same (philosophic) game. The author does not think that the dialogue between representatives of those positions, which retains the latter unchanged, may be useful and will favour the rapprochement of the two philosophic traditions.
