Join TSR now to have your say on this topicSign up now

Who is your favourite philosopher? Watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    Nice google searching. First search item too. Ouch.

    https://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&safe...w=1366&bih=643

    Do you not have any ideas or intellectual explorations of your own? And if you're going to resort to google searching for your contributions at least elaborate on them. Don't just lump quotations you've nipped from the first page of a google search without at least commenting on them.

    I couldn't care less what Nietzsche thought about anything. To me, he was a clown. Mill had some sense and economy in his work which I admire.
    I've read Nietzsche's works, and knew he wrote something about Mill, so I needed a quick reference from which to copy and paste. I'm hardly going to go through Nietzsche's entire library for a quote. That's what the internet is there for.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    I've read Nietzsche's works, and knew he wrote something about Mill, so I needed a quick reference from which to copy and paste. I'm hardly going to go through Nietzsche's entire library for a quote. That's what the internet is there for.
    You 'knew he wrote something about Mill'; gosh, what a font of knowledge you are. The fact that the exact quotation you were looking for just so happened to be the first search result for 'Nietzsche on Mill' is interesting, isn't it? The fact that you just lumped it there with no elaboration makes it all the more likely you were just hoping to look good by quoting something Nietzsche said about Mill without really having any intellectual understanding of or allegiance with it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    You 'knew he wrote something about Mill'; gosh, what a font of knowledge you are. The chances that the exact quotation you were looking for just so happened to be the first search result for 'Nietzsche on Mill' is slim. The fact that you just lumped it there with no elaboration makes it all the more likely you were just hoping to look good by quoting something Nietzsche said about Mill without really having any intellectual understanding of or allegiance with it.
    Well, I knew he wrote something about the vulgarity of Mill. So I wanted the exact words and sentence. So I googled it. If it was at the top of the search I cannot be held accountable for that. I might have rushed to post something but it just so happened that the quote I needed was right there at the top. I searched "Nietzsche on Mill".
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    Well, I knew he wrote something about the vulgarity of Mill. So I wanted the exact words and sentence. So I googled it. If it was at the top of the search I cannot be held accountable for that.
    More transparent than Piers Morgan at the Leveson Inquiry
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'd say either Russell and Wittgenstein first, followed by A.J. Ayer and A.C. Grayling.
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Tuerin stop derailing my thread please. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob :))
    Socrates!

    All I am sure I know is that I know nothing!
    Who would neg Socrates :'(
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Either Bergson or Sartre.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Another vote for John Stuart Mill here.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    Tuerin stop derailing my thread please. :rolleyes:
    I prefer to think of it as development
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    More transparent than Piers Morgan at the Leveson Inquiry
    If you say so, Tomás de Torquemada.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    There really aren't many philosophers that I like or respect, but Epicurus is pretty cool

    Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
    Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing?
    Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing?
    Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing?
    Then why call him God?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've really enjoyed reading Iris Murdoch (who is known more for her novels than her philosophy), even though I don't completely agree with her moral philosophy.

    Some quotes I've liked:
    "Freedom is, I think, a mixed concept. The true half of it is simply a name of an aspect of virtue concerned especially with the clarification of vision and the domination of selfish impulse. The false and more popular half is a name for the self-assertive movements of deluded selfish will which because of our ignorance we take to be something autonomous."

    "The ordinary person does not, unless corrupted by philosophy, believe that he creates values by his choices. He thinks that some things really are better than others and that he is capable of getting it wrong. We are not usually in doubt about the direction in which Good lies. Equally we recognize the real existence of evil: cynicism, cruelty, indifference to suffering. However, the concept of Good still remains obscure and mysterious. We see the world in the light of the Good, but what is the Good in itself?"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oakeshott:
    'The cure is not worse than the disease'
    'The world is boundless and bottomless'
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    Like Christianity? Kant's moral imperative was like a Christian 'thou shalt'.
    That really doesn't do justice to Kant's moral philosophy, tbh. The Bible does not specify any sophisticated reasoning behind its commandments, whilst Kant develops a system for deriving morals.

    Kant and Rawls both articulate a hugely interesting normative principle, imo. For moral and political philosophy, respectively, they're immensely influential.

    My favourite philosopher is John Rawls - all his essays up to and including his book on 'A Theory of Justice'. After than he goes downhill by conceding too much to opponents. His work on the original position thought experiment, rather than his principles, are perhaps his greatest legacy.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonfly07)
    There really aren't many philosophers that I like or respect, but Epicurus is pretty cool

    Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
    Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing?
    Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing?
    Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing?
    Then why call him God?
    What is 'evil' would come under scrutiny; also the idea of lesser evils and the greater good. The abrahamic would probably say something like 'we cannot comprehend His grand plan for the universe, but He does have one'
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Martyn*)
    If you say so, Tomás de Torquemada.
    Would I rather be a figurehead of the Spanish Inquisition or Piers Morgan?

    No-brainer, really
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Jeremy Bentham : The greatest happiness for the greatest number is fundamental for morals and legislation.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tuerin)
    What is 'evil' would come under scrutiny; also the idea of lesser evils and the greater good. The abrahamic would probably say something like 'we cannot comprehend His grand plan for the universe, but He does have one'
    That argument would only work in an imperfect world, which would assume that god either intentionally made the world imperfect, or wasn't able to make it perfect in the first place.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dragonfly07)
    That argument would only work in an imperfect world, which would assume that god either intentionally made the world imperfect, or wasn't able to make it perfect in the first place.
    Once again we come to a complex idea - perfection. By human standards the world is imperfect; perhaps in the context of God's grand plan, should one believe in such a thing, it is perfect.
 
 
 
Poll
Which web browser do you use?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.