I believe is the relationship of philosophy and the development of man throughout the time.

I am really interested in your query, since I have never heard about this "philosophy" branch of Anthropology. It is not shown in our most frequently used Spanish dictionaries either, so my natural understanding would be that Antropología filosófica is the study of the biologic aspects of men and their societal behaviour, from a philosophic perspective.
If you happen to come accross a real definition, please let us all know!

Note h after t.

"... discipline that seeks to unify the several empirical investigations of human nature in an effort to understand individuals as both creatures of their environment and creators of their own values ... emerged as an academic discipline in Germany in the 1920s, after a time of increasing speculation in the human sciences. Scholars such as Helmuth Plessner, Max Scheler, and, earlier, Wilhelm Dilthey were concerned that the analysis of human nature through one narrow discipline (e.g., psychoanalysis, physical anthropology) would result in as many limited and deterministic views of humanity as there were empirical disciplines. Marxists, for example, saw economic forces as the only determinant of the human condition, while Freudians identified subconscious forces in that role. Philosophical anthropologists argued that human nature is complex and dynamic and ... constantly able to recreate itself within the confines of biology and culture."

Here is the beginning of an entry from the Encyclopedia Britannica. I don't think I can legally reproduce the whole thing, so I am putting the URL below--it will take you there directly. I am also giving you the URL for the Google page that lists a whole lot of sources on the subject.

philosophical anthropology

Man the rational subject

The great German philosopher Immanuel Kant credited Hume with having wakened him from his dogmatic slumbers. But while Kant concurred with Hume in rejecting the possibility of taking metaphysics as a philosophical starting point (dogmatic metaphysics), he did not follow him in dismissing the need for metaphysics altogether. Instead he returned to the Cartesian project of seeking to find in the structure of consciousness itself something that would point beyond it.

Thus, Kant started from the same point as the empiricists, but with Cartesian consciousness--the experience of the individual considered as a sequence of mental states. But instead of asking the empiricists' question of how it is that man acquires such concepts as number, space, or colour, he enquired into the conditions under which the conscious awareness of mental states--as states of mind and as classifiable states distinguished by what they purport to represent--is possible. The empiricist simply takes the character of the human mind--consciousness and self-consciousness--for granted as a given of human nature and then proceeds to ask questions concerning how experience, presumed to come in the form of sense perceptions, gives rise to all of man's various ideas and ways of thinking. The methods proposed for this investigation are observational, and thus the study is continuous
with natural history. The enterprise overlaps with what would now be called cognitive psychology but includes introspection regarded simply as self-observation. But this clearly begs a number of questions, in particular, how the empiricist can claim knowledge of the human mind and of the character of the experience that is the
supposed origin of all ideas.

[snip]

The translation is 'philosophy of anthropology'. This would refer to history of anthropological thought and thinkers in the area.