Who is your favorite philosopher?

MarcoD

I don't have a favorite philosopher, I don't consider myself to be very good at it. But I read some Spinoza once in a close approximation of what he originally wrote.

What is nice is his attempt and trying to apply pure logic, or science, to derive ethics and a proof, or understanding, of God. Unfortunately, it's all very dated. If the Ethica would have been published now, he would end up in a home for the mentally ill.

(Probably, my favorite philosopher would be Nietzsche. Because he makes me laugh with his dark irony.)

Albuquerque

My own odd interpretation of the use of Ethics and moral good is always related with the integration of progressive sets of systems and categories of interest and the amount of effort, energy efficiency, work, implied in the functional task process towards an end whatever that end might be as long as it is natural (genuine)...so I have a relative to scope approach interpretation of its use, regarding the depth of field concerning systemically either the species among other species, or the social group to which we want apply a moral judgement...and yet my view still tends like Spinoza´s towards a necessary and deterministic approach to the problem in terms of logical and rational justification...that is to say, that moral and ethics cannot be justified or circularly reasoned with more moral and ethics but they need something out of their own scope to ground themselves as an say, valid "operating system" regarding behaviour and conduct...my notion of "good" in here is thus further reducible to the notion of optimal input in terms of the energy efficiency or the amount of work one can spare to accomplish a task which is seen as necessary for the species or the said group at hand in its natural causal progression in the world...and that´s how I look at the problem shocking as it may seam...a sort of neo-Darwinistic stance concerning the need for cooperation among social species regarding the accomplishment of complex tasks that require increasing degrees of consensus in order to be carried about and in which trust is a central factor...

MarcoD

I assume you don't have kids?

e^(i Pi)+1=0

Lao Tzu and Alan Watts

ryan.j

No Rand or Camus?!

Nothing shy of an affront.

920118

Including Rand or Camus in this poll would be like including the pope in a poll on everyones favourite scientists...

My favourite is other.

moogull

Where's Descartes!

eggshell

hume is a badass, also a big fan of epicurus. if you've read hume's "enquiry concerning human understanding" then i highly recommend reading carl jung; you really only have to read the first chapter to understand the relationship between the two.

not surprised to see the rationalist school of thought held in such high esteem on this forum though, i can't help but laugh.

sigurdW

A good choice!

sigurdW

Good Question!

malik333

socrates is my favourite philosopher.

Gravy

Diogenes the Cynic... Not for his contributions to philosophy, but because he was visibly indifferent to wealth, and evidently carried around a lamp during the day time. Just imagine having a beer (or five) with the guy while showing him a CGI-heavy documentary on dinosaurs! ... He'd be hilarious, in my mind.

Favourite philosopher with regards to his philosophical contributions? .. Late Wittgenstein and his private language argument.

epenguin

I totally reject Alan Watts for reasons exactly opposite to the ones you give.

Dadface

The Mekon and Lord Snooty and his pals.