"Top 5" Intellectuals and Philosophers

[Unhealthy2]

If you want to discover teaching methods of law professors I suggest less "reading articles" and more going to lawschool. Having done that myself, I find little value in discussing the hypothetical articles some hypothetical person wrote about hypothetical professor's hypothetical methods.

Pretty hard for someone to read articles that are hypothetical, isn't it?

[Trotskylvania]

Uhuh, I've been reading some articles on jurisprudence recently, and if philosophers like to waste time on meaningless drivel, then law professors love to waste time on highly limited and more amateur meaningless drivel based upon the meaningless drivel of philosophers.

If you want to discover teaching methods of law professors I suggest less "reading articles" and more going to lawschool. Having done that myself, I find little value in discussing the hypothetical articles some hypothetical person wrote about hypothetical professor's hypothetical methods.

If you want to complain about philosophy and have it be anything but meaningless drivel, I suggest less time spent complaining on the internet about the meaningless nature of philosophy, and more time spent actually understanding what philosophy is.

[Neo Art]

By what I find worthwhile.

Seriously, why is this a hard concept?

So are you the arbiter of what is and is not worthwhile?

For me? Yes, of course. Who else would be? You? I am the sole, utter, and final arbiter in what I find a worthwhile concept. I am the lord god on that particular subject.

As for what you or others may think, I find little concern in what other people find worthwhile.

Thus, you have failed to answer my challenge.

oh noes! I'm being banished from the intellectual elite left and right today!

[Unhealthy2]

No, my entire profession is applied law. The *cough* "philosophical" underpinnings of the law is of no concern to me, it is what it is.

On the other hand, the philosophical underpinnings of mathematics and theoretical physics are of serious concern to many highly accomplished mathematicians and physicists, are they not worthwhile things? Likewise, in social sciences, particularly economics, the philosophy of science, of epistemology relating to what can be inferred for instance from statistical data, is of huge concern, since it's important to assess what we can and cannot know in these fields, which raises serious philosophical concerns.

But it's sooo boring, and I've arbitrarily (and hypocritically) decided that it's worthless.

[Hydesland]

If you want to discover teaching methods of law professors I suggest less "reading articles" and more going to lawschool. Having done that myself, I find little value in discussing the hypothetical articles some hypothetical person wrote about hypothetical professor's hypothetical methods.

No, I mean literally articles from law professors. But I digress, why don't you apply those suggestions to yourself and actually study philosophy before you decide to dismiss at least two centuries of analytic study, and thousands of years of study overall.

[Neo Art]

If you want to complain about philosophy and have it be anything but meaningless drivel, I suggest less time spent complaining on the internet about the meaningless nature of philosophy, and more time spent actually understanding what philosophy is.

No, I mean literally articles from law professors. But I digress, why don't you apply those suggestions to yourself and actually study philosophy before you decide to dismiss at least two centuries of analytic study, and thousands of years of study overall.

and just for the sake of doing the timewarp:

Troll.

You know, it's amazing how if you actually hold an opinion around here, the only POSSIBLE explanation is that I'm just some uncultured philistine who is incapable of thought, and not worthy of the "intellectual elite".

While I have no particular interest in floating my credentials, I hope it doesn't shatter y'all's worldview to find out that people can actually do things like go to college, take philosophy classes, read all the same books you do, and yet, despite all that, still disagree with you.

I know it's a hard concept to swallow, and if it really helps you to get through the day to think that if I disagree with you it must just be because I don't know what I'm talking about, being some uneducated baboon of a man, then so be it. If your ego depends on it, have at it.

[Unhealthy2]

oh noes! I'm being banished from the intellectual elite left and right today!

Troll.

1) I haven't banned you from jack shit. I just pointed out that you made a profoundly stupid and self-defeating statement. Don't get pissy with me for pointing out your poorly thought out argument.

2) Your argument was, in fact, self-contradictory, and therefore it DESERVED to be knocked down.

3) It's obvious that you DO care what we think, despite the fact that you pretend not to. If you didn't care what we thought, you wouldn't be posting here at all.

[Unhealthy2]

You know, it's amazing how if you actually hold an opinion around here, the only POSSIBLE explanation is that I'm just some uncultured philistine who is incapable of thought, and not worthy of the "intellectual elite".

While I have no particular interest in floating my credentials, I hope it doesn't shatter your worldview to find out that people can actually do things like go to college, take philosophy classes, read all the same books you do, and yet, despite all that, still disagree with you.

I know it's a hard concept to swallow, and if it really helps you to get through the day to think that if I disagree with you it must just be because I don't know what I'm talking about, being some uneducated baboon of a man, then so be it. If your ego depends on it, have at it.

Translation: I said something profoundly stupid and people pointed out to me that it was stupid. Because I have no real response, I'm just going to pull a trick out of the Republican playbook and accuse them of "elitism."

[Conserative Morality]

You know, it's amazing how if you actually hold an opinion around here, the only POSSIBLE explanation is that I'm just some uncultured philistine who is incapable of thought, and not worthy of the "intellectual elite".

I love how you say this while condemning philosophy. It's quite entertaining.

While I have no particular interest in floating my credentials, I hope it doesn't shatter your worldview to find out that people can actually do things like go to college, take philosophy classes, read all the same books you do, and yet, despite all that, still disagree with you.

Except it's not so much 'Disagreeing with someone' so much as 'Rejecting an entire area of study despite employing said study by your own admission'. It's like Creationists denying Nuclear Half-lives while living in a house powered by a Nuclear plant.

[Jakaragua]

Nietzsche, Aristotle, Hegel, Kant, Marx.

[Greater Tezdrian]

Aristotle
Hobbes
Plato
Gentile
Machiavelli

[Neo Art]

Translation: I said something profoundly stupid and people pointed out to me that it was stupid. Because I have no real response, I'm just going to pull a trick out of the Republican playbook and accuse them of "elitism."

Oh trust me, I'm not accusing ANY of you of being anything even close to "elite".

[Roodswood]

To, ahem, get the thread back on topic- the top 5 philosophers who influenced me (not in order of importance):

1) Plato

2) Aristotle

3) St. Thomas Aquinas

4) Alasdair MacIntyre

5) Joseph de Maistre

[Neo Art]

You know, it's amazing how if you actually hold an opinion around here, the only POSSIBLE explanation is that I'm just some uncultured philistine who is incapable of thought, and not worthy of the "intellectual elite".

I love how you say this while condemning philosophy. It's quite entertaining.

I'm glad I can entertain, my posts obviously have more value than most philosophy.

[Ninja Sloths]

*snip*

I want to hear your 5 picks.

Einstein, Feynman, Fermat?

[Conserative Morality]

I'm glad I can entertain, my posts obviously have more value than most philosophy.

Actually, your statements on life and the value of philosophy are philosophical in and of themselves. So it's not so much that you're more entertaining then philosophy so much as your philosophy is entertaining. At least in part due to the irony and hypocrisy.

[Ninja Sloths]

Nietzsche, Aristotle, Hegel, Kant, Marx.

If you'll just replace the last one, we can kick off with the Philosopher Song from Monty Python ...

[Neo Art]

I'm glad I can entertain, my posts obviously have more value than most philosophy.

Actually, your statements on life and the value of philosophy are philosophical in and of themselves.

I hate to tell you, but the absence of philosophy is no more philosophy than the absence of air is air, the absence of water is water, or the abscence light is light. I find no worth in philsophy because I have found no purpose in its function, no value in its methods and no validity of its claims. Thus I don't bother to engage in pointless philosophical exercises that, frankly, aren't worth my time.

Unless we want to define philosophy so broadly as to include basically and thought on any subject in any way, which is the only way you could possibly try to shoe horn my statements to be "philosophical ones", in which case, fuck it, EVERYTHING'S philosophy. "what should I have for lunch today?" is a philosophical conundrum.

In which case we've reduced philosophy to useless yet again, the uselessness of the overly vague.

[Conserative Morality]

I hate to tell you, but the absence of philosophy is no more philosophy than the absence of air is air, the absence of water is water, or the abscence light is light.

Except you make judgments on the value of life and the value of actions. Which is, of course, philosophy. Denial of philosophy is no more absence of philosophy than denial of air is absence of air.

[Unhealthy2]

I want to hear your 5 picks.

Einstein, Feynman, Fermat?

I gave them already on page 2, I think.

[Jakaragua]

Nietzsche, Aristotle, Hegel, Kant, Marx.

If you'll just replace the last one, we can kick off with the Philosopher Song from Monty Python ...

Keep him,

for the philosopher football match.

[Unhealthy2]

I hate to tell you, but the absence of philosophy is no more philosophy than the absence of air is air, the absence of water is water, or the abscence light is light.

What is this, an attempt at a formal logical argument?

[H N Fiddlebottoms VIII]

What did Avatar physically accomplish, other than kill a couple furries?

That alone earns James Cameron a fucking medal.

But that alone is the problem with philosophy in that it tries to quantify "accomplishment". What's it all MEAN? Why are we HERE? What's our PURPOSE?

It's fundamentally silly, it means nothing, we're here for no reason, and we have no purpose. The subject is useless because the questions are pointless.

No, you started trying to quantify accomplishment when you said that philosophy accomplishes nothing and implied that other pursuits might actually have value. Now you seem to be claiming that nothing has value, rendering philosophy no more or less a waste of time than masturbation or pretending to have attended law school.

[Hydesland]

You know, it's amazing how if you actually hold an opinion around here, the only POSSIBLE explanation is that I'm just some uncultured philistine who is incapable of thought, and not worthy of the "intellectual elite".

I'm not saying you're an uncultured philistine, you're obviously a very intelligent person, nobody denies that, but I don't really think anyone here, even someone who has a degree in philosophy, can legitimately dismiss all of it, since it is such a massively huge field of study with such a long history, there is no way you could have adequate knowledge on all areas of it. In fact, I don't really distinguish philosophy from most other subjects, other than vocational ones, since most subjects, from economics to the hard sciences, all evolved out of philosophy (or derivatives of such), which just means "love of knowledge" after all. I think all of these subjects rely on philosophical concepts, such as the philosophy of science, the study of things like the falsification principle, or even the study of logic (and really, logic is important to pretty much everything).

[Neo Art]

I hate to tell you, but the absence of philosophy is no more philosophy than the absence of air is air, the absence of water is water, or the abscence light is light.

Except you make judgments on the value of life and the value of actions. Which is, of course, philosophy. Denial of philosophy is no more absence of philosophy than denial of air is absence of air.

Again, if philosophy is to be defined so laughably broadly as "making judgements on the value of actions" then every single fucking decision we make is philosophy. Choosing tuna over meatball for lunch was philosophy. Thinking "it's gonna rain, I should bring an umbrella to work today so I don't get wet" is philosophy. "gee, I feel like a cigarette, it's been a stressful day" is philosophy.

Every god damned decision we ever make with any kind of concious thought is a value judgement of actions. The entire set of human conciousness then becomes "philosophy", and the subject becomes so overly broad as to be nonsensically pointless.