Was he the greatest non-analytic philosopher of his time? Neitzche was not all that impressive I think. I feel that a lot of what he says can be reduced significantly. Discuss.
I am not too fond of James' defenses of religion and the irrational. But he is probably the finest American philosopher of the last 200 years, although this isn't saying much (America does not have a great many wonderful philosophers).
I don't know if that is a fair statement, there are a fair number of great American philosophers as compared to most other nations. on what do you base your statement?
you made the claim, it is up to you to support it. also, I didn't say that you were wrong, I just asked you to back up your statement.
I did not mean to offend. America does have a long list of excellent philosophers. I was simply impling that no matter now good or how many, they can never trully compete amongst the greats of the past, simply because they have only been around for 500 years or so, not 2500.
Clowns, every one of them. Still, mention must be made of W.V.O Quine. Regardless, Prince_James is correct; compared to Great Britain, France or Germany, noted American philosophers are few.
I base it on the fact that he is the most entertaining. And he seems to have a simplistic way of putting things. But alas, he is also one of the most widely celebrated Western thinkers.
I'd give proper respect to Quine, Searle, Rawls, Nozick, Putnam, Dennet, Rand, and others. But even if their contributions are not disregardable or worthless in any sense of those terms, their viewpoints tend to be too constrained to consider them truly "great". There is not one amongst them that seems to have truly broken the mold in regards to having established something. They all strike me as very minor philosophers in that regard. There is not a Kant, a Descartes, a Plato, or anything like that, in American philosophy. This may itself reflect the change in philosophy as influenced by the modern analytic tradition. In fact, I rather think that is the case.
ok, first, its Dennett, not dennet. second, I do agree other nations have more and better philosophers, it simply seemed too categorical to state that there are few great American philosophers. you should not celebrate too early. though Plato was great, Descartes and Kant are not perfect. I mean cmon, Dualism? give me a break. moreover, Kant's "Categorical Imperative" theory of morality seems pretty misguided.
Cato: Thanks for the correction on the name. We may disagree with them, but their intellectual scope was great.
Diogenes of Sinope ??? That guy was something else... Chucked his only possession(a bowl to drink from), when he saw a child drink with his hands. "One day, observing a child drinking out of his hands, he cast away the cup from his wallet with the words, " A child has beaten me in plainness of living." He also threw away his bowl when in like manner he saw a child who had broken his plate taking up his lentils with the hollow part of a morsel of bread. He used also to reason thus: " All things belong to the gods. The wise are friends of the gods, and friends hold things in common. Therefore all things belong to the wise." He was a Christian before Christ? How more non-analytical can you get? Also: watch your mouth about Nietzsche...
He masturbated on the side of the road. When people passed, he would say: Would that hunger could be satisfied by rubbing the belly.