Who is your favorite philosopher?

  • Thread starter jduster
  • Start date
In summary, the conversation includes discussions on various philosophers such as Hume, Lao Tzu, Spinoza, Wittgenstein, Leibniz, Quine, Putnam, Russell, Rorty, Aristotle, Lindsay Lohan, Samuel Clemens, Ambrose Bierce, George Carlin, Jean Paul Sartre, Noam Chomsky, Parmenides, and Zeno of Elea. Some participants express their preferences and reasons for choosing certain philosophers, while others bring up the importance of Eastern philosophers and the need to not take life too seriously. There is also a mention of The Dude, a laid back and humorous figure who represents the idea of not taking life too seriously.

Favorite philosopher?

  • socrates

    Votes: 5 6.2%
  • plato

    Votes: 7 8.6%
  • aristotle

    Votes: 5 6.2%
  • nietzsche

    Votes: 8 9.9%
  • kierkegaard

    Votes: 3 3.7%
  • kant

    Votes: 4 4.9%
  • hume

    Votes: 5 6.2%
  • aquinas

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • mill

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • smith

    Votes: 1 1.2%
  • locke

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • berkeley

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • liebniz

    Votes: 6 7.4%
  • spinoza

    Votes: 4 4.9%
  • russel

    Votes: 5 6.2%
  • wittingstein

    Votes: 7 8.6%
  • other

    Votes: 19 23.5%

  • Total voters
    81
  • #36
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...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
I assume you don't have kids?
 
  • #38
Lao Tzu and Alan Watts
 
  • #39
No Rand or Camus?!

Nothing shy of an affront.
 
  • #40
ryan.j said:
No Rand or Camus?!

Nothing shy of an affront.

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

My favourite is other.
 
  • #41
Where's Descartes!
 
  • #42
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.
 
  • #43
fashizzle said:
my two favorites are

parmenides
zeno of elea

what do you guys think about these two?

A good choice!
 
  • #44
moogull said:
Where's Descartes!
Good Question!
 
  • #45
socrates is my favourite philosopher.
 
  • #46
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.
 
  • #47
e^(i Pi)+1=0 said:
Lao Tzu and Alan Watts

I totally reject Alan Watts for reasons exactly opposite to the ones you give.
 
  • #48
The Mekon and Lord Snooty and his pals.
 
<h2>1. Who is your favorite philosopher?</h2><p>As a scientist, I do not have a favorite philosopher. My focus is on empirical evidence and the scientific method, rather than philosophical theories.</p><h2>2. Why don't you have a favorite philosopher?</h2><p>As a scientist, my work is centered on observing and analyzing data, rather than philosophical concepts. I respect the contributions of various philosophers, but my field of study does not require a favorite philosopher.</p><h2>3. Don't you think it's important to have a favorite philosopher?</h2><p>While some individuals may have a favorite philosopher, it is not a necessity for all fields of study. As a scientist, my focus is on understanding the natural world through empirical evidence, rather than philosophical ideologies.</p><h2>4. How do you incorporate philosophical ideas into your work as a scientist?</h2><p>As a scientist, I may consider philosophical ideas when evaluating the implications of my research, but ultimately my work is guided by the scientific method and empirical evidence.</p><h2>5. Do you think science and philosophy are at odds with each other?</h2><p>No, I believe that science and philosophy can complement each other. While science focuses on empirical evidence and the natural world, philosophy can provide a framework for understanding the implications and ethical considerations of scientific advancements.</p>

1. Who is your favorite philosopher?

As a scientist, I do not have a favorite philosopher. My focus is on empirical evidence and the scientific method, rather than philosophical theories.

2. Why don't you have a favorite philosopher?

As a scientist, my work is centered on observing and analyzing data, rather than philosophical concepts. I respect the contributions of various philosophers, but my field of study does not require a favorite philosopher.

3. Don't you think it's important to have a favorite philosopher?

While some individuals may have a favorite philosopher, it is not a necessity for all fields of study. As a scientist, my focus is on understanding the natural world through empirical evidence, rather than philosophical ideologies.

4. How do you incorporate philosophical ideas into your work as a scientist?

As a scientist, I may consider philosophical ideas when evaluating the implications of my research, but ultimately my work is guided by the scientific method and empirical evidence.

5. Do you think science and philosophy are at odds with each other?

No, I believe that science and philosophy can complement each other. While science focuses on empirical evidence and the natural world, philosophy can provide a framework for understanding the implications and ethical considerations of scientific advancements.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
21
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Poll
  • General Discussion
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
973
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
1K
Back
Top