• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Most/least favorite philosophers...

bigred

Penultimate Amazing
bigred
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
22,693
Location
USA
...preferably with de-emphasis on religious aspects as much as reasonably possible, simply as I'd rather not digress into a religious discussion which has no doubt been discussed in great length on numerous other threads. I realize it's impossible to avoid altogether though, esp in the case of guys like Nietzsche/Kierkegaard/etc - I'd just prefer more general opinions on ones you have studies and did or didn't care for (perhaps respecting or even liking some you disagree with or vice-versa?).
 
Last edited:
Favourites:

Lao Tsu.
Spinoza.
Berkeley.
Kant.
Hegel.
Schopenhauer.
Husserl.
Heidegger.
Wittgenstein.
Paul Tillich.
Paul Feyerabend.
Thomas Kuhn.
Thomas Nagel.
Richard Rorty.
U.G.Krishnamurti (not to be confused with J.Krishnamurti).

Least Favourites:

Nietzsche.
Paul Churchland.
Daniel Dennett.
 
Quark. The Ferengi rules of acquisition describe american society better than anything else.
 
Likes: Nietzsche, Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hume.

Dislikes: Kant, Hegel, Locke, Heidegger.


eta: He counts as religious, undoubtedly, but I also like Aquinas. I completely disagree with his premises and conclusions, but the arguments themselves are beautiful.
 
Favorites : Gautama Buddha, Plato, Zapfe.

Non-favorites : Kierkegaard, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes.
 
Least- Jean-Paul Sartre. (A drunken fart, or so I'm told)

Most- Maynard G. Krebs. Possibly the most succinct philosophical statement ever, "WORK?"

Followed closely by Alfred E. Nuemann. "What, me worry?"

Deep stuff....
 
Most philosophers are a waste of time to me, and I have studied philosophy at four different schools in my youth, including the unversity.

To me, good philosophers are those who really accomplish something, and sadly they are not always counted as philosophers. I speak of thinkers like Einstein, Newton, Darwin etc. ..They, and likeminded, are the real philosophers in my world, the achievers, the rest is just banter. I'm strange like that.
 
Favorites: William James, Charles Pearce, Freddy Nietzsche, John Stuart Mill

Dislikes: Plato, Descartes, Rand

Then there is the guy I love and hate at the same time; Kant.
 
c4ts said:
Like the one where he determined that dead babies go to Hell...
Click to expand...

It may not be a nice theory, but it certainly makes more sense than "Limbo". If you're going to have a religion, it should be as sensible as possible, and not determined to make the universe look soft and cuddly. The universe is demonstrably not soft and cuddly, which makes religions that try to sell that concept even more ridiculous than religion itself inherently is. Theology shouldn't be a sales campaign for the religion.
 
Favorite: Mario Bunge, because I met him in person (yeah, I haven't read much when it comes to philosophy in general, so there's an objective criterion for picking a favorite).
Least favorite: Rand and Nietzsche, because they are the perennial favorites of every asocial pseudointellectual misanthropic teenagers who actually don't know anything about philosophy in general.
 
Marquis de Carabas said:
Non-Favourite-- lifegazer
Click to expand...
Sure, define philosophy loose enough and everyone is a philosopher. When viewed in the proper light even lifegazer can be thought of as a philosopher. Of course "you can't always depend on that light." --Arthur Bach
 
Favorite: tie between Rand and Descartes

Least Favorite: any of the pragmatists.
 
Favourites:
Gautama Buddha, Daniel Dennet, Karl Popper, W. W. Bartley

Least Favourites:
Ayn Rand
 
Thomas said:
To me, good philosophers are those who really accomplish something, and sadly they are not always counted as philosophers. I speak of thinkers like Einstein, Newton, Darwin etc. ..They, and likeminded, are the real philosophers in my world, the achievers, the rest is just banter. I'm strange like that.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately you're not strange at all, in your apparently complete lack of comprehension as to what the practice of philosophy is about.

I'd say my favorites include Hume, Kant (more for the rigor of his efforts than for his conclusions), Russell (more for his political and social work than for his logic and mathematics), and Popper. But it depends on who I'm reading at the moment. I'm currently reading a lot of Rawls, but I don't find him terribly persuasive.
 
JamesDillon said:
Unfortunately you're not strange at all, in your apparently complete lack of comprehension as to what the practice of philosophy is about.
Click to expand...
Or maybe I'm just a step ahead of you. Good philosophy tends to become science if a given musing turns out to be adequately empirically justified.

Sure, it can can be interesting to try to understand nature from pure logical reasoning and fancy musings - rather than empirical investigation. But let fair be fair, the empirical approach is the most fruitful from a status quo scientific and practical point of view.

Besides, the philosophers you mentioned as your favorites, are mostly just interesting from a historical point of view. And philosophy is indeed the study of the history of philosophy. But I study music composition and north-european iron age history these days, and it has been more than ten years since I read an actual piece of historical philosophy. But I don't miss it, there were too much baloney in it, imo.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom