I'm thinking of writing something on the relation between analytic philosophy and scientism. Analytic philosophy is much broader in subject matter than positivism, since the analytic approach dispensed with positivism. But of course the analytic philosophers retained the ideal of clarity in writing. That's still the biggest problem with continental philosophy, its obscurantism.

Then there's the ancient approach to philosophy which was more about practice and was closer to religion, since of course science hadn't yet been developed to pull philosophy from its founding mission. But what is the primary aim of philosophy, given that science has become the main source of knowledge? That's the big question for philosophy now, I think.

I haven't read much Haack, but I'm familiar with the pragmatists' middle paths.