Who are they? I know there's Dawkins, Tenzin Gyatso, and some bishop who's name I can't remember, but are there any who could parallel Mill or Hegel?
I think some of them are right here on this site as well as other boards. Seems that many people are as gifted as those you've mentioned from what I read online. Just because they don't produce books or are collge grads they still can exceed expectations.
I was thinking almost the same thing, Cosmos. Philosophy, as a mode of being, has grown up—the pied piper is no longer essential.
Who on sciforums has produce even one post that you can put next to any single paragraph from one of JS Mill's Essays and say they are equal in quality? There are some pretty cool people here, but that's like saying you seen Socrates at the end appt. selling crack.
What kind of Philosophy are you into? Analytic or Contemporary? Either way, I agree with cosmic, just because someone hasn't published a book or had a formal education doesn't mean they cannot be at the same level as any other mainstream or well-known philosopher in history...Also, focusing on only one type of Philosophy or one or two philosophers (e.g., Mills and Hegel) will leave you without any answers to the questions that you seek. Immersing yourself in all types of Philosophy and thought, whether you agree or disagree, is the only true method of learning and advancing yourself.
I like all philosophy, I just used Mill and Hegel as examples because On Liberty was one of the best things I've ever spent my time reading, and I'm currently reading Hegel's Science of Logic. I would say I probably like analytical philosophy over contemporary in most cases though.
How much philosophy have you read? By the way, I don't know if he is one of "today's" philosphers, because he is dead, but J. Krishnamurti is one of my favorites to read, and one of the most brilliant men of the last century, at least.
I've read a few Socratic dialogues, quite a few [insert show/movie title] and philosophy books, a couple The Minds of the Great Philosophers type of books, lots of blogs, wikipedia entries and other internet stuff, and some of the 'classics.' Every 3 months or so I'll develop an interest in philosophy for a couple months and then get tired of it for a while again. I'll read his wiki, and probably the references from it, thanks.
A lot of people point to his famous speech given at the dissolution of The Order of the Star "Truth is a Pathless Land" as a good introduction to him and his work. http://bernie.cncfamily.com/k_pathless.htm
There are plenty of people writing intelligent and insightful philosophy today (or at least in recent years, since a lot of my favorites have died in the past 20 years). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_philosophy I think the post-structuralist/post-modern stream is worth investigating (i.e., Jacques Derrida, Giles Deleuze, Michel Foucault, Richard Rorty, etc.), especially if you're interested in the political aspects of philosophy (which I assume from the examples you gave). A lot of their stuff is fairly abtuse and crosses multiple disciplines, but it's also thought-provoking. It also makes for better reading than a lot of contemporary analytical philosophy, although I have to admit that I'm not as well versed in the latter so my impressions may be skewed.
I just think that I've read some very good philosophies here but really can't link you to any of them. I believe that we need to listen to what our peers say for sometimes they are smarter than any philosopher that has come along...IMHO.
I agree, and also, I would nominate Osho, lol; for me, those 2 guys walk hand by hand in bringing "life´s big questions" to the light, in a simple manner, understandable to all.
Have present-day philosophers asked or answered any philosophical questions that haven't been asked or answered hundreds of years ago? Baron Max
Good one, the answer is no. BUT, the real stuff have been deleted from records in order to keep manipulating people as they do now (politicians & priests). It is hard to tell what is true from ancient records, a new source is always good to have.
Indeed, even repeated aphorisms are a good remedy to remove the lies and bullshit that prevades today or the future..
Its not so much about answering questions as it is about finding the right questions to ask alot of the time. For all those who think philosophy is useless, read up on karl popper. Anyone whos a fan of the scientific method owes popper a very large pint, or infact just pour a little liquor once in a while (since hes now dead). Sir Karl Popper (1902-1994) The most important philosopher of science since Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Sir Karl Popper finally solved the puzzle of scientific method, which in practice had never seemed to conform to the principles or logic described by Bacon. Instead of scientific knowledge being discovered and verified by way of inductive generalizations, leaping from data into blank minds, in terms that go back to Aristotle, Popper realized that science advances instead by deductive falsification through a process of "conjectures and refutations."
Yep. Another one to look at is Peter Singer's work on animal rights, and his general utilitarian ethics.
So long as we are nominating people who are dead, but haven't been dead too long. Let's throw in a brilliant woman, Ayn Rand.
Peter Singer. He's the bonehead who says you should be allowed to "abort" your child for up to a year after its birth, correct?
No. He has not proposed any such hard-and-fast rules. He has, however, made the argument that there is no clear line dividing the moral issues surrounding infanticide from those surrounding abortion. He argues that birth does not provide an easy line that is not arbitrary. He says that in many cases, late-term abortion is practically indistinguishable from infanticide.
