Since we had a favorite scientists thread I figured that we can have a favorite philosopher thread which it has been awhile since we have had a thread of this nature around. It is here where you may state your world view from [in]morality, logic, happiness, et alia and so forth. Reasons for such and if you wish to debate then that's fine too.

Note: While I realize that this may be difficult but do try to follow the forum rules regarding conduct and content. In particular things pertaining to religion or politics which I realize is a large portion of discussion with things of this nature.

My favorite philosophers.

[Antiquity]

Epicurus- Was ahead of his time with his ideas of Atomism with views that closely match our own in some regards centuries before AD1. His materialistic ideas appeal to me along with his disregard for superstitious tradition that was so prevalent in his time admitting woman into his school in a very much patriarchy sociality. And having taught me that hedonism is not necessarily that of debauchery but instead in his case a minimizing of pain with a happy outlook of life despite physical pains that later claimed him in life.
Democritus- Like Epicurus a believer of Atomism with some later influences on mathematics sharing my views as a materialist.

[Contemporary]

Friedich Nietzsche- Perhaps a cliche if also controversial choice. Despite being technically a nihilist was also very much for affirmation of life (eternal recurrence, amor fati) that was something of a free spirit encouraging others to do the same that one should be able to question the value of values or that of established systems of morality. In addition to presenting the idea of an ubermensch that we may strive for above that of the despisers of the body or the last man.
Bertrand Russel- For a few reasons I won't get into too much depth into I approve of his ideas of rationalism in his role as a logician through not so much his pacifism (YMMV). I also find his social commentary quotes to be enlightening.
Thomas Hobbes- Mostly for the social contract theory in that a government is to protect the citizen just as the citizen should be expected to serve the state with some restriction of freedom for the sake of order for absolute freedom is no different from that of anarchy. And thus some means of compliance must be reached to better keep the populace under some element of control.

As you might guess from the above count I count myself a believer of the following ideologies of greatest import to myself where I label myself.

• Secular Humanist
  
• Moral Nihilist
  
• Materialist/Rationalist

Remember to respect others views but what are your views is the question.

Yeah, this is going to get ugly. Fast.

I spent a few years of my study on Adorno (and his context, of course). Doesn't really count as a favourite, but more as a 'I definitely grasp what he's trying to say'.

For fun, I liked social and political philosophy (which I can't really discuss), decision and game theory, bits of logic, etc. Don't really have one favourite guy, always kept a broad perspective during my philosophy studies.

Secular Humanist and Moral Nihilist is an interesting combination, and certainly not one I've seen before (although they both blend well with Materialism).

I'm not sure if I have a favorite philosopher, mostly because I haven't read enough to decide. However, I guess I consider myself a Utilitarian, probably Preference or maybe Act (dependent on the situation). However, I'm willing to acknowledge that Utilitarianism has it's flaws, and it's not always the best option.
I'm something of a Materialist, and a really staunch Fallibalist.
I guess I have Existentialist and Absurdist tendencies, although I tend to stray from making a complete assumption about the meaning of life, considering the vastness of the question, and the sheer lack of knowledge we honestly have about it. I suppose I'm a Secular Humanist, to.
So, in short:
Utilitarian
Materialist
Rationalist
Fallibalist
Existentialist/Absurdist
Secular Humanist

Philosphy: National Socialism
Icon: Joseph Goebbels

^ trololol

My knowledge of Philosophy is limited to an A level course, but of all the philosophers we've learned about, I think David Hume is one of my favorites. So Scottish.

I'm not trolling. If you don't believe me, then don't, but please don't point fingers.

Secular Humanism

Sir Terry Pratchett

The teachings of Epicurus still apply to modern life. He was, in my opinion, one of the most intelligent people ever to live and that is reflected in his philosophy. There is no philosopher who had a better understanding of life.

Actually, screw that, my new favourite philosopher is whoever is running the MLP facebook page

"If earth ponies can have unicorn and pegasai children, then are the horns and wings are just recessive traits? So when they were split into clans, did they exile their young if they were different to the appropriate tribe?"

I, umm... Alrighty then,

I'm actually taking Intro to Philosophy this semester. This is my first year in college.
Being an English major, can anyone tell me if I should take Logic 1 & 2 as my two Math courses? I'm not sure exactly what they entail, except that I heard they were related to Philosophy.

I like me some Foucault, although I don't claim to know all of his work inside out. I pretty much haven't picked up one of his books since Uni, but he was the philosophist/sociologist that I really clicked with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epicurus, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Citium, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno_of_Elea

It is my firm belief that you are not in any way affected by things, but are instead affected only by your reactions to things. Free will (given to each of us at birth) and self control (something which must be bitterly fought for) allow any being who holds both at the same time to transcend all material concerns.

Also, stuff gets crazy when you divide by infinity

Such a fine idea to make a thread about this. My jargon in English is a bit faulty, so I hope to explain clearly enough.

Herakleitos (for his ideas of chaos, flow, different from later antique Greek philosophers)
Spinoza (for his almost pantheist conception of the universe)
Schopenhauer (for his pessimism and influence on Nietzsche)
Nietzsche (basically, for every single thing he did)
Freud (for showing there are more fundamental powers at work in humans than reason)
Marx (for showing how modern economy is alienating)
Foucault (for continuing nietzschean ideas)

I wouldn't call myself a believer or follower of any widespread philosophical current.

I admire Ayn Rand and Niccolo Machiavelli. I don't ENTIRELY agree with Rand's ideals as they are utopic ideals and relies on certain traits human nature just doesnt seem capable of doing in the long run.

Blaise Pascal

Hezekiah

August Niemann

Then please, expand.

Personally, I have not paid attention to philosophers, my personal philosophy is to do what makes you happy, so whatever that falls under, thats what I believe.

I suscribe to the Theodore Roosevelt theory, be a man!

Thomas Huxley.. practicality, honesty, answering a question not known or not testable with "unknown" rather than coming to a true/false conclusion anyways. Inventor of agnosticism.

If your not trolling. Can you explain why you like that ideology ?

I dont see the appeal. I expect indoctrintion plays a large part in this.

Thomas Paine, Edmund Burke, John Locke, Saint Paul, Jesus, and Robert Bacon. I'm personally a Libertarian, I believe in the will of the individual to decide his/her own destiny (within reason of course). I'm also a Christian, so there's that to.

What can I say that I'm a bit odd like that through I think of myself as a ethical nihilist of sorts. I'm kinda surprised at the amount already that count themselves a fan of Epicurus or counts them self a Secular Humanist.


I can certainly agree with Machiavelli in the way that a ruler cannot always do what is ethically sound for it would often serve to counter to his interests putting the Prince at an disadvantage. A pragmatist view point to be sure but such is the way of politics in that usefulness is the only objective reality. I can't say I'm too much of a fan of Ayn Rand however whose philosophy of objectivism that I find disagreeable. Namely that while we may strive to be rational beings of logic; however untruth is the condition of life made more unreliable by the many varied views of humanity whose individual perceptions number by legion. And her books like Atlus Shrugged or Anthem just come off as one big straw argument to me where any extreme when taken too far with individualism or collectivism would become unpreferable which is I'm guessing what you disagree on.

I dunno, everybody loves Epicurus

And it seems to me that Secular Humanism is a really popular belief amongst nerds, especially the more idealistic ones, hence you'll find a lot of them on the Internet, especially on a nerdy forum.

Yeah, whenever anyone says they're one, I just think "really, how original".

"let's see, uh, you also think of yourself as asixual, you are an occasional pot smoker, as your favourite book is The God Delusion".


Also, I'm adding Tolstoy and John Stuart Mill to my list.

More likely stupidity.

Personally I don't have a favorite philosopher that basically guides my view on things. They are not competitors in my book, but equally contributers to the story of humanity. But If I had to pick a line in particular, I would say the existentialists (Kirkegaard, Sartre, Camus, just to name a few).

I find it hard to expand on my views in a moderated environment at this point in time, as one with views typically deemed not socially acceptable will quickly find. However, in an effort to at least give some form of explaination without drawing too much negative attention, I'll do my best. Obviously some things aren't going to be covered but that can't be helped.

To sum it up, I believe in a blend of Seperatism, positive and negative eugenics, State above self, Social Darwinism, union of State with religion & public life, elaborate state-sponsored pagentry, emphasis on culture & myth, the benefits of regulated propaganda, and the elimination of diverse political entities.

Again, this hardly scratches the surface, but let me assure you that I am not typically sympathetic to most people who claim some form of National Socialism. I have also not been "indoctrinated", as I make decisons for myself as anyone who knows me will tell you. I do not know a single person in my life who claims even half of my own beliefs and most of my friends are blatently against this philosophy.