Who's the shittest philosopher?

[Ilovelucy]

Dennett! Actually, he's not the shittest, just the most overrated and popular among many that don't know a lot philosophy. I heard a great line about him on a "Philosopher's Zone" podcast. "And Dennett, who's I agree, one of the more clever characters in the second half of the 20th century and today, Dennett sort of dances a complicated dance around the ultimate nature of things. He doesn't like to be caught doing metaphysics really."

The real shittest has to be Alain de Botton, mainly because I don't like being told how I can be happy with my poverty by the son of a Swiss banker.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

D'Zousa?

[Animavore]

Not a philosopher. His job description is "public speaker".

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Not a philosopher. His job description is "public speaker".

I guess you'll just have to be philosophical about that entry then.

[JOZeldenrust]

Dennett! Actually, he's not the shittest, just the most overrated and popular among many that don't know a lot philosophy. I heard a great line about him on a "Philosopher's Zone" podcast. "And Dennett, who's I agree, one of the more clever characters in the second half of the 20th century and today, Dennett sort of dances a complicated dance around the ultimate nature of things. He doesn't like to be caught doing metaphysics really."

The real shittest has to be Alain de Botton, mainly because I don't like being told how I can be happy with my poverty by the son of a Swiss banker.

Dennett is good in his field, philosophy of mind, and his dislike for metaphysics is pretty much a result of his position in the whole monism/dualism debate. If you're a monist, metaphysics just isn't very interesting.

[Ilovelucy]

Dennett! Actually, he's not the shittest, just the most overrated and popular among many that don't know a lot philosophy. I heard a great line about him on a "Philosopher's Zone" podcast. "And Dennett, who's I agree, one of the more clever characters in the second half of the 20th century and today, Dennett sort of dances a complicated dance around the ultimate nature of things. He doesn't like to be caught doing metaphysics really."

The real shittest has to be Alain de Botton, mainly because I don't like being told how I can be happy with my poverty by the son of a Swiss banker.

Dennett is good in his field, philosophy of mind, and his dislike for metaphysics is pretty much a result of his position in the whole monism/dualism debate. If you're a monist, metaphysics just isn't very interesting.

Metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, and being a materialist isn't the only way of being a monist. There is a metaphysical element to the materialist position because it is an ultimate statement on the nature of reality, but Dennett is very careful not to stray into this area. He also spends a lot of time attacking a Cartesian Dualism that no-one else is really defending. There isn't really a monism/dualism debate in contemporary philosophy. I think that Searle and Chalmers are far more interesting and accomplished in Philosophy of mind and Dennett's output tends to consist of shady, obfuscatory rebuttals of their positions.

[charlou]

Think I'll join you over here ...

[FBM]

Metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, and being a materialist isn't the only way of being a monist. There is a metaphysical element to the materialist position because it is an ultimate statement on the nature of reality, but Dennett is very careful not to stray into this area. He also spends a lot of time attacking a Cartesian Dualism that no-one else is really defending. There isn't really a monism/dualism debate in contemporary philosophy. I think that Searle and Chalmers are far more interesting and accomplished in Philosophy of mind and Dennett's output tends to consist of shady, obfuscatory rebuttals of their positions.

Your description of metaphysics is right on the money. There are still a few religious types who resort to the dualistic argument to try to wedge their fave sky-daddy into reality, tho. One such wingnut made a brief appearance around here a few weeks ago. After a few pages of discussion, he suddenly "got too busy" to continue.

[Hermit]

Oh dear, the competition is fierce and the field is huge. Yes, Derrida is a leading contender, and so are Kierkegaard, Barth, Anselm, Heidegger and Sartre among many others. For the record: I don't think Nietzsche is anywhere near the front.

[DRSB]

What about Karl Marks? I think he was pretty smart! Not his fault Lenin decided to apply the whole thing to Russia. So, the shittiest of them all was Lenin; you may object he does not qualify as a philosopher, but he wrote and wrote theories too.

[redunderthebed]

What about Karl Marks? I think he was pretty smart! Not his fault Lenin decided to apply the whole thing to Russia. So, the shittiest of them all was Lenin; you may object he does not qualify as a philosopher, but he wrote and wrote theories too.

It's spelt Marx just read it off the poster i have of him on my bedroom wall.

Neither of them are philosophers but political theorists regardless of what you think of there theories.

I'm of the opinion that most philosophers are wanky naval gazers that say alot about nothing that matters in the greater scheme of things.

Although Alain De Botton annoys the shit out of me most of all fuck off with your poncy crap.

[Hermit]

What about Karl Marks? I think he was pretty smart! Not his fault Lenin decided to apply the whole thing to Russia. So, the shittiest of them all was Lenin; you may object he does not qualify as a philosopher, but he wrote and wrote theories too.

Marx developed some very astute concepts about about feudalism, capitalism and the underlying philosophical foundations to them. Lenin and Zedong misapplied the lot of them. Neither Russia nor China had reached the stage of development where internal contradictions of a fully developed capitalism had come to a head that Marx held to be necessary for a successful socialist revolution. The revolutions in both those countries had nothing to do with such a transition. In each case, anybody could have kicked the rotten structures down. The revolutionaries who did the kicking managed to sincerely convince themselves that the capitalist phase could be skipped. History demonstrated them to be wrong. The revolutions were doomed to fail even without the likes of Stalin.

[Hermit]

Redunderthebed, If you want to correct the spelling of others without finishing up with egg on your face, you'd want to ensure that you get your own spelling right, at least in that particular post. It's naval.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Redunderthebed, If you want to correct the spelling of others without finishing up with egg on your face, you'd want to ensure that you get your own spelling right, at least in that particular post. It's naval.

Err... was this supposed to be some kind of post-modern deconstrucionist irony? Or did you just get it rather wrong, Seraph?

Naval = "of or relating to a navy"
Navel = "belly button"

Or are you saying that philosophers are fond of sailors?

[redunderthebed]

Wow out of probably two or three paragraphs i spelt one word wrong. If you read it out it sounds the same, i apologise if i was stoned/not paying attention in many english classes at school seraph.