Your Philosopher of Choice is ...

[Harp]

Are you a reader of his too Harp?

Yes, sometimes....
Nietzsche's assault on religion and ethics, and morality/and his challenge
still confronts a world mired in existentialism, nihilism, and moral
relativity's astigmatic solipsism. I disagree with his perspective but
it is undeniably true that he threw down a philosophic gauntlet.

 

[CanadaDoll]

I struggle through his books, my recent one I've had for over six months and I'm still slogging through itlol .

I dislike most religious doctrines, so I like to see his points of view on the subject
He offends my sensibilities, which forces me to think and reevaluate my thoughts, which I love him for. So anytime I need to shake myself up, or get angry, I go and read a chapter or two!

Bonus points for him though, is that I always walk away more open to ideas, so I learn a lot more.

 

[Harp]

I dislike most religious doctrines, so I like to see his points of view on the subject
He offends my sensibilities, which forces me to think and reevaluate my thoughts, which I love him for.

Do you think Nietzsche's espousal would have been different had he
been born in the 20th C; particularly had he witnessed WWI and the
1917 Russian Revolution?
How do you feel about Sartre; and his Critique?

 

[CanadaDoll]

Every philosopher would be different if they had been in 20c, it's thier observances of the hardships and humanity's lows that gave them their ideas, and contempts.
I think that if they had seen the 20thC they either wouldn't be philosophers, or they would be on the contraband lists faster than the speed of sound.

I'm not familiar with Sartre sadly, I don't see him at the bookstore too often.

 

[Harp]

I'm not familiar with Sartre sadly, I don't see him at the bookstore too often.

Rumor is that he hangs out at the Barnes & Noble on State Street,
drinks tea and scribbles endlessly on a small pad, with a pipe clenched
between his teeth.

 

[CanadaDoll]

Well then! I'll have to head down there post hastelol The fellow with the pipe you say.....

I'll probably have to order any copies I want, philosophy is not so popular that there's a grand selection at the stores here, one half of a shelf unit is devoted to it at my bookstores:rage:

 

[Harp]

Samsa,
I just don't think that it is possible to meaningfully distinguish between philosophers or philosophy and theologians or theology by looking at the content of a work. Your definition illustrates this point rather well, as it makes Socrates into a theologian. Remember that he claimed, at least as Plato has it, to be divinely inspired to ask his annoying questions by a certain 'daemon' or spirit that instructed him on what to do and what not to do. That is to say, he paired his reason with divine revelation. So, was he a theologian or a philosopher?

I simply can't find an organic distinction between these two categories that isn't either over-inclusive or under-inclusive.

....Socrates' 'daemon' is more of en raison de speculate rather
than a divine spark. Plato's subsequent muse, however, tears aside
Lady Philosophy's veil for a more elusive and mystical pursuit of the
human soul. Read in this vein, Plato writes in a style remarkably like
the future mystic, St John of the Cross; whose Dark Night of the Soul
carries Plato's muse much further.

 

[Harp]

The Confessions, followed by The City Of God.
dean

City of God writ by Augustine later in life, reveals more of a less forgiving and more strict; perhaps even cynical personal nature consonant with apparent residual guilt and its lasting torment. The Lion of Africa
in the winter of his discontented life.

 

[pablocham]

Harp, I am sorry, but wouldn't it be St. John of the Cross who writes like Plato, and not vice versa? Also, my French is pretty rusty and before it was rusty it was just bad, but I am not really sure what you mean by "en raison de speculate." At any rate, Plato's Socrates seems to make it pretty clear in the Apology that he considers his Daemon to be something other than and outside of himself and that his credence in it was sufficient to rebut atheism charges. The Daemon is very different from the Christian soul that St. John is concerned with, and had Plato/Socrates meant soul he could and would have used the word psyche, which is the Greek word for it. So I think that St. John is talking about something very different from what Plato is talking about. Whether you agree with that or not, I am neither qualified to, nor was I trying to give a full and complete explanation of the Daemon; rather, in the context of that earlier discussion I just wanted to point out that there is no clear or obvious line dividing theology from philosophy.

By the way, you don't really think, as your comment seems to suggest, that St. John of the Cross is more important than Plato?

 

[Harp]

Harp, I am sorry, but wouldn't it be St. John of the Cross who writes like Plato, and not vice versa? Also, my French is pretty rusty and before it was rusty it was just bad, but I am not really sure what you mean by "en raison de speculate." At any rate, Plato's Socrates seems to make it pretty clear in the Apology that he considers his Daemon to be something other than and outside of himself and that his credence in it was sufficient to rebut atheism charges. The Daemon is very different from the Christian soul that St. John is concerned with, and had Plato/Socrates meant soul he could and would have used the word psyche, which is the Greek word for it. So I think that St. John is talking about something very different from what Plato is talking about. Whether you agree with that or not, I am neither qualified to, nor was I trying to give a full and complete explanation of the Daemon; rather, in the context of that earlier discussion I just wanted to point out that there is no clear or obvious line dividing theology from philosophy.


By the way, you don't really think, as your comment seems to suggest, that St. John of the Cross is more important than Plato?

What I was considering is the Socratic mindset, as differentiated from
psyche or anima; seen from a secular position. Plato's view toward the
soul, in the vein it is written approaches St John of The Cross' (future)prose.
Did not comment on Plato's individual status as regards St John of The Cross,
merely remarked that the latter continued this muse.

 

[Harp]

in the context of that earlier discussion I just wanted to point out that there is no clear or obvious line dividing theology from philosophy.

Admitttedly, the line separating philosophy and theology can blur,
theology being pursued by philosophy makes it all the more so.

 

[Grnidwitch]

I'm so impressed here.

My favorite philosopher was my then, 5yo nephew. He was sitting with his coloring books while my mother and I were discussing the state of my unhappy marriage and he just looked up at me with is soulful brown eyes and said that I should "play more". Yep, play more. We laughed at the time but now, I hear his sweet little man's voice whenever things are stressfull. 5 minutes of play solves the ills of the world.

So, my new friends, PLAY MORE.................

 

[Harp]

Veto for Seneca...since he could have slain Nero,
and consequently made a real contribution to Stoicism....lol

 

[nulty]

I like reading Nietsche and Ovid's ideas, but my favorite philosopher is a professor of mine named Stefan one idea............. "Can God be petitioned with prayer?" He's hilarious and perfectly thought provoking at the same time.

I thought it was Jim Morrison made that statement on the "Soft Parade"....

 

[CanadaDoll]

wouldn't know I've never heard the song

 

[carebear]

The "would a truly great as described G-d listen to prayer?" issue is hardly new or unique. You can see it in Plato and it was propounded by T. Jefferson (an Enlightenment classicist). The basic reasoning behind it is classically Greek, "perfection" is impersonal and remote.

Garry Wills does a good overview in his "Why I Am A Catholic".

 

[Flying Scotsman]

Aldo Leopold.

 

[Orgetorix]

Favorite of all time would have to be Jesus Christ.

Favorite modern philosopher would probably be Herman Dooyeweerd.

 

[Harp]

Favorite modern philosopher would probably be Herman Dooyeweerd.

Interesting choice, H.D.
I personally feel that neo-Kantism eludes Truth, however.

 

[Harp]

...as does Kant.