let's r8 each others taste in philosophers
>>7596541
template
I'll answer for 75% of /lit/...Camus
>>7596549
good thing he's not on the list a?
>>7596541
1/10
try branching out of your intro to philosophy class
P.s. I know he didn't identify himself as a philosopher but how it's Camus not on there
>>7596569
neither did a lot of those people on the list.. Rousseau for one
>>7596549
>>7596569
>liking Camus
really nigga?
>Marcuse
>that massive faggot Habermas
>but not Adorno
Is this for real?
>>7596600
how's sophomore year?
>>7596541
r8 don't h8
>>7596541
>Newton
>philsopher
>>7596617
RIGHT HE WAS <AN PHYSICIAN LEL XDD
>>7596614
really sucks ass dude
>>7596541
>no Parmenides
>>7596622
Why the LEL XDDD? He was a physician and wouldn't be considered a philosopher. Same goes for Avicenna.
>>7596614
>>7596617
he wasted ten years of his life trying to find hidden messages in the bible, biblical hermeneutics counts as philosophy my nigga, it's just when a world renowned scientists wastes his life on it we all recoil in shame and horror but when some gay ass literature professor builds his career around it, well that's just what literature professors do after all
Hayek, Wittgenstein, Marx, Epicurus
Bonus point for Pascal, Montaigne, Benjamin, Adorno and Lukács.
>>7596659
this guy
>>7596659
imagine swallowing all that jizz man
all those sweaty philosopher dicks in your face
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
>>7596680
With all due respect:
>>/lgbt/
>>7596597
kek
>>7596597
>muh footnotes
What criteria are we using here?
>>7596597
whitehead pls
>>7596541
Let's go back to reddit
>>7596597
this
Philosophy only got interesting when Gottlob Frege emerged.
>No Stirner
>No Trismegistus
Cmon son.
Where's Dr. Seuss?
>>7596610
Chalmers, Lacan, and literally who?
Lacan and Deleuze/Guattari are all you need
>>7596541
>>7596614
kierkegaard and hegel?
>>7599495
rawls
>>7599708
tfw when nostalgia of policy debate ;(
No Siddhārtha Gautama and only western philosophers? Indefensible bad template.
This guy
Where's Varg?
>>7599913
Everything offered by the east has been assimilated and improved upon by western philosophers. In fact, it is indefensible as a western man, being unable to read eastern works in their original, to appeal to eastern philosophy.
>>7599936
Eastern philosophy is unscientific, subjective trash. How can you live knowing you will never be able to satisfy your arguments because they're based on a false premise? You either have truth or you have nothing.
>>7599968
>You either have truth or you have nothing.
source for this claim?
>>7596541
Come at me, bros.
>No Hannah Arendt
>>7599980
Objective: 1+1 equals 2.
Subjective: Men and women are equal. Of course this is not true because we are different. If we are different, we cannot be equal. You must therefore base the equality of man and woman on something abstract, subjective; like every human having a soul - which is something you cannot prove and you will have to depend on the compliance of others in order to sustain the false validity of this statement.
You either have truth or you have nothing. Source: Me. Objective truth stays the same no matter what, it's eternal. Water will always be transparent. The belief that water is not transparent is not true and is therefore not sustainable, that statement will be discarded sooner or later, thus turning into nothing.
Had to resize it for some reason...
Anyway, red is for those I've read and agree with.
Yellow is for those I plan to read in the future, or have their books, but haven't gotten around to read them yet.
And green is for Socrates, who you can't really differentiate from Plato, who actually wrote down all the stuff he supposedly said.
>>7600023
eww
>>7600131
Thank you for your very erudite comment m8.
>>7600123
>Aristotle
>Jesus
>No Thomas Aquinas
How come? He's basically a mixture of the two.
>>7600221
Liking both aristotle and jesus is already wrong
>>7600221
Not read him, so far.
>>7600228
What they have in common, and which I admire, is a form of response to previous dogmatic or idealistic instances and a development of the same. Aristotle responding to Plato's ideas and forms, and Jesus the hierarchic religion of the Jews and the Old Testament. To some extent, both Heraclitus and Hegel also share this position.
God tier:
>Stirner
>Schopenhauer
Shit tier:
>Aristotle
>Nietzsche
>>7600247
>Stirner
Shit just realised that this pic predates /lit/'s obsession with Stirner.
>>7600242
But they do it ultimately differently.
But the thread is about "liking", not "agreeing", so I understand what you're saying, I do like both Zeno and Epicurus meditations, and the way they get to their respective philosophies.
>>7600247
I really want to see the reason you listed Aristotle and Nietzsche as shit tier, especially Aristotle.
He's the first goddamn worthy reality check in philosophy.
What do you dislike about Aristotle and Nietzsche?
>>7596541
Kierkegaard and Baudrillard desu
>>7596559
Did you just fucking spell "eh" as "a"?
>>7600023
>And green is for Socrates, who you can't really differentiate from Plato, who actually wrote down all the stuff he supposedly said.
Xenophon (another of Socrates' pupils) wrote Socratic dialogues as well. Also I'm pretty sure the Apology is considered to be a reliable account of what Socrates said at his trial.
Where the fuck is Jeremy Bentham?
i don't like listing people i haven't read yet
>>7600836
*opens closet*
right here dude
>>7600907
yo that's rad as fuck i wish they had a mummified ben franklin on display like ho chi minh
>No Ricardo
>No Bentham
>No Von Mises
lmao.
>>7600907
o shit thanks senpai
>>7600016
You don't know the difference between objective and subjective lmaooooooooo
>>7599966
fucking commie
>>7600023
>And green is for Socrates
This.
R8 me, you don't have to be gentle.
>>7596541
>>7596541
Only read like 5% of all those authors tho.
>>7601168
Also:
>no Cioran
>>7596541
