Your Philosopher of Choice is ...

[McPeppers]

*puts in another vote for Aquinas*

 

[Twitch]

My favorite philosopher was USMC ace pilot Greg "Pappy" Boyington who said, "Just name a hero and I'll prove he's a bum."

 

[Jack Scorpion]

My grandfather:
"You come into the world naked and you go out in a suit. You can't lose."

 

[The Mad Hatter]

Plato.

his dialogues actually are also dramas. ( He wanted to be a playwright. ) You can read them as such. They have plots. If you read only one dialogue, I recommend the <Gorgias.

There is a lot of misconception about the "Socratic Method," particularly by law professors. A lot of people think that Socrates was some sort of Athenian Professor Kingsfield, who sadistically cross examined people. While, say, the Euthyphro or the Protagorous is like that, read the Symposium instead. That is a series of speeches given at a dinner party. Each speech is about the topic of "love," so when you hear about "Platonic love," the discussions in the Symposium is what is being referred to. But there is more. Note that the Symposium took place at a dinner party. As a result, the correct management of a good dinner party has been accepted as a serious subject of philosophic inquiry.

That is not necessarily to say that Plato's thinking is better than Aristotle's; but the works of Aristotle read like engineering texts. ( There is scholarly debate about Aristotle's texts. Some scholars assert that they are lecture notes; while others actually argue that they were copied down by a student of his - that Aristotle himself actually did not write them. ). Therefore, if you want Aristotle instead; get a pony. I recommend the works of Mortimer J. Adler, a mid-20th century neo-Aristotelian.

 

[Harp]

Aristotle

Aristotle's 'Eudemian Ethics' relate Platonic dialogues much more closely
than the 'Nichomachean.' I admire Plato, though I can still recall being
excoriated by a favorite prof for criticizing certain Platonic concepts.

Having experienced the 'Socratic method' in law school, I will admit
that it has a certain legitimacy; however, this method hardly reflects
philosophic inquiry so much as simple factual analysis that, for the most
part, simply skims-the-surface. When incorrectly employed without
precision, this approach quickly loses focus.


I nominated Descartes earlier in this thread, but I would also add
Boethius; whose heroism and tragic death rightly rank his 'Consolation'
in the annals of Philosophy.

 

[Steve]

For me it's always been the Grecian philosphers who could realistically appraise the beauty of the world, and at the same time, write tragedies that reflected the hardness of the world.

 

[Paisley]

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Why? All I can say is that his words ring true to me.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Enter the transcendentalists!

.

 

[MKL]

Clarke

I would cast my votes for Gordon Clarke and possibly Jonathan Edwards the New England divine. Clarke was a presuppositionalist.

 

[Dixon Cannon]

Phineas Parkhurst Quimby

The 'Founder' of the New Thought Movement.

http://phineasquimby.wwwhubs.com/

-dixon cannon

 

[HLSheppard]

Jesus......


.....although he is much more than a philosopher.

:arated:

Same here.

 

[MudInYerEye]

Ambrose Bierce.

 

[Harp]

St. Augustine

The Confessions, followed by The City Of God.
Thanks for asking, how about yourself?

dean

"For many of my years (perhaps twelve) had passed away
since my nineteenth, when, on the reading of Cicero's
'Hortensius,' I was roused to a desire for wisdom."

---St. Augustine, 'The Confessions'

 

[Harp]

I must add Gilbert K. Chesterton to my list of philosophers.
His Orthodoxy is timeless.

 

[Fletch]

Hobbes and Machiavelli.

Hobbes: Life is nasty, brutish, and short.
Machiavelli: And here's how you can help keep it that way AND win valuable prizes!

 

[Mr. Lucky]

I prefert Calvin to Hobbes -

“Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants won't help.”

 

[melankomas]

Richard Dawkins

 

[moustache]

Ditto

Jesus......


.....although he is much more than a philosopher.

Same answer.

JD

 

[Samsa]

Richard Dawkins

Richard Dawkins as philosopher? Do you mean as scientist (realizing that the natural sciences are technically a branch of the utilitarian philosophies)?

I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but always thought of Dawkins as a scientist-cum-philosopher. I poked my nose into "The God Delusion" and was quite disgusted (not at his conclusions, though I disagree with them) but his argumentation.

 

[melankomas]

St. Paul was a theologian.

i don't think he can be discounted for being so. a philosopher is a lover of wisdom, i believe, and i daresay he was that. certainly, his idea of what wisdom is differs from mine, but i'd count him a philosopher.