• Lucid Dreaming - Dream Views




    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
    Results 1 to 25 of 26
    Like Tree3Likes

    Thread: Who's your favorite philosopher/s?

    1. #1
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11

      Who's your favorite philosopher/s?

      Who is your favorite philosopher?

      Mine are David Hume, Alan Watts and Noam Chompsky. I was thinking of adding Denis Diderot to the list but then I may as well include a plethora from Nietzsche to Plato because I think every philosopher I've read has made some very compelling arguments (even Ayn Rand, though after you give it proper thought you realize she's too prickly).

      When I consider my favorite philosophers, I consider those that I already agreed with before I ever even read them. I consider philosophers who I've advocated long before I even heard of them, let alone read their works. I cannot read a sentence from Hume, Watts and Chompsky without getting excited at how eloquently they put concepts I would fail to describe in ten times the number of words.

      Honorable mentions include certain comedians that do extremely well at picking apart our conception of reality. Demetri Martin, Bill Hicks, Jim Gaffigan, Dave Chappelle, Katt Williams and Mitch Hedberg are all amazingly good at speaking the truth about life's inconsistencies. Furthermore, many writers that would also be deemed philosophers of a kind have said very profound things, such as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, or post modernists like Faulkner, Emmerson, Thoreau and Whitman, and of course I can't exclude Oscar Wilde from the list. Nor Douglas Adams for that matter.

      And just to give a few more honorable mentions so no one feels like they have to exclude anyone they think of as a philosopher: Martin Luther King Jr, Sage Francis, Bob Dylan, Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, Manly P Hall, Karl Marx, Gautama Siddhartha, Jesus of Nazareth, His Holiness the Dalai Lama the 14th, Carl Jung, Quentin Tarantino, Alan Moore, fuck I could go on for ever.

      Shit I completely forgot Camus and Sartre
      Last edited by Omnis Dei; 04-17-2012 at 08:09 PM.
      IndieAnthias and Ctharlhie like this.

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    2. #2
      Lucid Shaman mcwillis's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jan 2010
      Posts
      1,470
      Likes
      458
      DJ Entries
      3
      Yesterday I was watching some very interesting old film clips of interviews with Jiddu Krishnamurti, well known for speaking on philosophical and spiritual subjects.

      Please click on the links below, more techniques under investigation to come soon...


    3. #3
      Banned
      Join Date
      Apr 2011
      Posts
      1,373
      Likes
      1887
      DJ Entries
      1
      Arthur Schopenhauer.

    4. #4
      Czar Salad IndieAnthias's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2010
      Gender
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      707
      Likes
      491
      Alan Watts
      Noam Chomsky
      Daniel Quinn

      Those are my main 3 right now, and like you said bits and pieces, and entire chunks from lots of other people. You listed many of the same ones I would list (props for Mitch Hedberg!) Maybe I would add Lao Tzu, Terrence McKinna, Charles Darwin, Stephen Fry, E. O. Wilson. I like Wittgenstein on language, although I've only heard 2nd-hand explanations of his work.

    5. #5
      Xei
      UnitedKingdom Xei is offline
      Banned
      Join Date
      Aug 2005
      Posts
      9,984
      Likes
      3082
      Hume. For me you could almost say he started and finished philosophy. He's like the sole mountain in the steppe of its history. Most important were his insights into human cognition, but he was also bang on on religion (back when that was dangerous) and was even a really great person.

      I wouldn't call most of the people in this thread 'philosophers' in the first place, though. People like Schoepenhauer are artists.

    6. #6
      Czar Salad IndieAnthias's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jul 2010
      Gender
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      707
      Likes
      491
      Quote Originally Posted by Xei View Post
      I wouldn't call most of the people in this thread 'philosophers' in the first place, though. People like Schoepenhauer are artists.
      I take a "trunk of the tree" view of philosophy, so everything thought-related, be it science, art, whatever, is just a branch of philosophy. Historically, this is how science evolved. Not so much art, but you get my point.

    7. #7
      Xei
      UnitedKingdom Xei is offline
      Banned
      Join Date
      Aug 2005
      Posts
      9,984
      Likes
      3082
      Hm, well, I'd say discourse about science is certainly philosophy, and indeed science was developed as a conscious philosophical undertaking, but science itself, that is, the body of knowledge ascertained by the scientific method, isn't philosophy.

      For instance, the existence of Europa, or indeed the existence of London, are science, but I don't think many people would call them philosophy. What we mean by the existence of Europa, and how we know of its existence, are what philosophy concerns itself with.

    8. #8
      Deuteragonist Achievements:
      Made lots of Friends on DV Populated Wall 1000 Hall Points Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class
      Wolfwood's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2010
      LD Count
      >50, <150
      Gender
      Location
      Sussex
      Posts
      2,337
      Likes
      3339
      Though Xei may call them artists: Nietzsche and Schopenhauer.

      Who looks outside, dreams;
      who looks inside, awakes.

      - Carl Jung

    9. #9
      Member Achievements:
      1000 Hall Points Veteran First Class
      tropicalbreeze's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Gender
      Location
      everywhere
      Posts
      923
      Likes
      1357
      Socrates and Osho also known as Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh

    10. #10
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11
      Quote Originally Posted by Xei View Post
      Hm, well, I'd say discourse about science is certainly philosophy, and indeed science was developed as a conscious philosophical undertaking, but science itself, that is, the body of knowledge ascertained by the scientific method, isn't philosophy.

      For instance, the existence of Europa, or indeed the existence of London, are science, but I don't think many people would call them philosophy. What we mean by the existence of Europa, and how we know of its existence, are what philosophy concerns itself with.
      All you have to do to understand they share a common ancestor is to look at the etymology. Philosophy means love of knowledge, it doesn't mean to toil in life's most basic paradoxes. That's simply the meaning that remained after every other subject branched into a different field.

      I like the show Magical Egypt (which you can find on youtube) about a symbologist's take on Egypt because he often goes back to a quote by Goethe. Paraphrased he said architecture is like frozen music. This is a philosophical statement, but it also looks at Ancient Egypt in new light because the show argues that Egyptians combined art, science, philosophy and religion all into one big study. This is distinct from the Catholic Church oppressing scientific discovery (though as the Egyptian society degraded it may have turned into that) because the scientists were the shot-callers and religion was like a way for the common man to understand the science symbolically. This is argued through the supremely unimaginable complexity and accuracy of the design of their architecture.

      It is argued, and I may be stepping into territory you find difficult to swallow, that the architecture of Egypt is a frozen song in a very literal sense. The structure of the shapes and their patterns often create harmonious vibrations through which people have found healing properties and positive vibes. This is from the series Magical Egypt and I recommend you see for yourself. Some concepts, I admit, are contrived but there's still something to take from it. Then, from the mouth of David Wilcock, which I admit is not the most trustworthy, there's this idea that the pyramid shape itself can be built in order to create harmonic functions equivalent to vibrational changes discussed in "What the Bleep do we know?" According to him, building a pyramid which is agreeable with pi and phi in the same way as the pyramids in Egypt, one can neutralize poison, along with a plethora of other transformations akin to healing and preserving life. I don't know if this is true, but I like to think the Egyptians had a completely different interpretation on reality as we did and that it's not necessarily incorrect. We haven't quite substantiated the power of harmonic frequencies yet, but that's not to say we never will. And perhaps something that slows us down is our attachment to the separateness of the buckets. A Behaviorist and a Molecular Geneticist both attempt to possess the truth of evolution while belittling the other. Same with psychologists and neuroscientists, and dozens of other studies. People get so wound up in their particular field, they attempt to filter every possible experience through their field without recognizing that there are so many thousands of different filters one can apply and not one is more true than another. If there is any truth, it is the aggregate. Orange is not more true than yellow, after all.

      To conclude, a quote by Goethe, also probably as paraphrased as the last "Science arose from peotry. When times change the two can meet on a higher plane as friends."
      Last edited by Omnis Dei; 04-18-2012 at 04:00 AM.

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    11. #11
      Member Achievements:
      Made Friends on DV 1000 Hall Points Veteran First Class

      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      Gender
      Posts
      708
      Likes
      348
      Whew, you've rattled off quite a few already. I'll throw Kant into the ring, he's one of my favorites.

    12. #12
      Deuteragonist Achievements:
      Made lots of Friends on DV Populated Wall 1000 Hall Points Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class
      Wolfwood's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2010
      LD Count
      >50, <150
      Gender
      Location
      Sussex
      Posts
      2,337
      Likes
      3339
      How about you put forward your favourite work[s] of your favourite philosopher[s]. It could make an interesting read for me and others.

      I'll start: The World as Will and Representation, A. Schopenhauer and The Myth of Sisyphus , A. Camus.
      Last edited by Wolfwood; 04-18-2012 at 11:35 AM.

      Who looks outside, dreams;
      who looks inside, awakes.

      - Carl Jung

    13. #13
      Deuteragonist Achievements:
      Made lots of Friends on DV Populated Wall 1000 Hall Points Referrer Bronze Veteran First Class
      Wolfwood's Avatar
      Join Date
      Nov 2010
      LD Count
      >50, <150
      Gender
      Location
      Sussex
      Posts
      2,337
      Likes
      3339
      Quote Originally Posted by Xei View Post
      Hm, well, I'd say discourse about science is certainly philosophy, and indeed science was developed as a conscious philosophical undertaking, but science itself, that is, the body of knowledge ascertained by the scientific method, isn't philosophy.

      For instance, the existence of Europa, or indeed the existence of London, are science, but I don't think many people would call them philosophy. What we mean by the existence of Europa, and how we know of its existence, are what philosophy concerns itself with.
      Yeah, I would consider the philosophy of any science (or pseudo-science) that which questions what we accept sort of 'a priori', or as a fundamental rule or method, for said science. Say, discussing the validity of the scientific method.... or the validity of basing nearly all of psychology on frequentist inference rather than, for instance, Bayesian inference.
      Last edited by Wolfwood; 04-18-2012 at 11:55 AM.

      Who looks outside, dreams;
      who looks inside, awakes.

      - Carl Jung

    14. #14
      Member Achievements:
      Made Friends on DV 1000 Hall Points Veteran First Class

      Join Date
      Jun 2010
      Gender
      Posts
      708
      Likes
      348
      Critique of Pure Reason, by Immanuel Kant.

    15. #15
      Xei
      UnitedKingdom Xei is offline
      Banned
      Join Date
      Aug 2005
      Posts
      9,984
      Likes
      3082
      Why?

    16. #16
      Member Isadore's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 2011
      LD Count
      1
      Gender
      Location
      England
      Posts
      34
      Likes
      9
      DJ Entries
      26
      David Hume's my favourite.
      I also like Descartes and Plato but not because I agree with their ideas. It's because their styles are interesting.
      Oh, and Bertrand Russell for his attitude.
      No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish - David Hume

    17. #17
      I am become fish pear Abra's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2007
      Location
      Doncha Know, Murka
      Posts
      3,816
      Likes
      540
      DJ Entries
      17
      I don't know much philosophy. I really wish my uni would offer 'contemporary philosophy,' instead of scattering them into their separate fields.

      But of the guys I do know, my favorite's Bertrand Russell. Camus is neat, too.
      Abraxas

      Quote Originally Posted by OldSparta
      I murdered someone, there was bloody everywhere. On the walls, on my hands. The air smelled metallic, like iron. My mouth... tasted metallic, like iron. The floor was metallic, probably iron

    18. #18
      Earth Wanderer Achievements:
      3 years registered 1000 Hall Points
      Warheit's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2012
      LD Count
      Zillions.
      Gender
      Location
      Earth
      Posts
      343
      Likes
      237
      DJ Entries
      1
      Isn't it kind of weird to have favorites whose ideas are at odds with one another?

    19. #19
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11
      um... no? Truth is the gestalt and nothing less

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    20. #20
      Earth Wanderer Achievements:
      3 years registered 1000 Hall Points
      Warheit's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2012
      LD Count
      Zillions.
      Gender
      Location
      Earth
      Posts
      343
      Likes
      237
      DJ Entries
      1
      Really? Considering Gestalt Theory is descriptive rather than explanatory, I find that statement quite odd.

    21. #21
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11
      What's the difference between descriptive and explanatory?

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    22. #22
      Banned
      Join Date
      May 2008
      LD Count
      don't know
      Gender
      Posts
      1,602
      Likes
      1144
      DJ Entries
      17
      Exercising my own reason and trusting it above all else.

    23. #23
      Earth Wanderer Achievements:
      3 years registered 1000 Hall Points
      Warheit's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 2012
      LD Count
      Zillions.
      Gender
      Location
      Earth
      Posts
      343
      Likes
      237
      DJ Entries
      1
      Quote Originally Posted by Omnis Dei View Post
      What's the difference between descriptive and explanatory?
      Speaking in generalities versus something definitive.

    24. #24
      D.V. Editor-in-Chief Original Poster's Avatar
      Join Date
      Jun 2006
      LD Count
      Lucid Now
      Gender
      Location
      3D
      Posts
      8,263
      Likes
      4135
      DJ Entries
      11
      You mean like trends vs facts?

      Since you're not online right now and I don't feel patient enough to reach complete clarification before stepping forward, I'm just going to go ahead and make my claim

      ge·stalt

      1. a configuration, pattern, or organized field having specific properties that cannot be derived from the summation of its component parts; a unified whole.

      2. an instance or example of such a unified whole.



      Generalities and Definitions also form a unified whole and do not represent the complete truth with out each other. A wave is not more true than a particle, and vice versa.

      In the most accurate sense of truth, no partitioned idea of truth is true. Only the complete unified whole of all ideas and perceptions can create anything remotely accurate to Truth with a capital T. To claim any specific philosopher or idea is more true than another is to claim that blue is more true than purple.

      Of course this isn't exactly practical, especially for decision making. When making decisions, you got to weigh your bet and play the odds, which means you have to utilize some amount of prejudice regarding your environment.
      Last edited by Omnis Dei; 05-29-2012 at 04:50 AM.

      Everything works out in the end, sometimes even badly.


    25. #25
      I am become fish pear Abra's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2007
      Location
      Doncha Know, Murka
      Posts
      3,816
      Likes
      540
      DJ Entries
      17
      Quote Originally Posted by Warheit View Post
      Isn't it kind of weird to have favorites whose ideas are at odds with one another?
      Things can be brilliant and at the same time incompatible. I admired Bertrand Russell's quest to capture mathematics formally and completely. I found it ironic and absurd that his own axioms could produce statements which referenced themselves, which if true held that there is no proof of themselves, or if false, implied there was a proof of the statement, leading to contradiction. Bertrand Russell made a system sufficiently powerful to show the incompleteness of math, though he had no idea something like that could happen.

      Camus, on the other hand showed the contradiction in living life, when death renders it meaningless to the individual. The contradiction is the absurd.

      We base our science on an incomplete foundation (rather than destroy it with inconsistency), and our very lives are contradictions. Both are true statements, and that's awesome.
      Last edited by Abra; 05-29-2012 at 06:32 AM.
      Abraxas

      Quote Originally Posted by OldSparta
      I murdered someone, there was bloody everywhere. On the walls, on my hands. The air smelled metallic, like iron. My mouth... tasted metallic, like iron. The floor was metallic, probably iron

    Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

    Similar Threads

    1. Philosopher's Strike
      By Xei in forum Senseless Banter
      Replies: 30
      Last Post: 10-03-2009, 02:01 AM
    2. The Dreams of a Philosopher
      By ThePhilosopher in forum Dream Journal Archive
      Replies: 3
      Last Post: 07-17-2007, 08:10 PM
    3. Dreams Of A Philosopher
      By XsupremeX in forum Dream Journal Archive
      Replies: 1
      Last Post: 12-05-2006, 06:25 PM
    4. Philosopher? Or Hypocrit?
      By Alex15 in forum Philosophy
      Replies: 13
      Last Post: 07-14-2005, 05:04 AM

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •