How to tell good philosophers from crappy ones?

Is the accademia ignoring him? He's shit. (eg. No one really cares about Sam Harris, even if he has released books and articles on his thought)
Are people commenting (even negatively) his works pn peer-reviewed journals? He's worth reading. (eg. Kant releases a book and virtually every philosopher in Europe and in the US read and write about him, since he had something interesting to say)

Jordan Peterson, obviously, is shit.

They deal with classics to a tremendous extent. So much, it's almost unbearable. But then, it depends if you're talking about continental or anglophone philosophy.

Well, philosophy sure is a tricky beast. It's "elitist" because it's not like self-help books.

>life is too short to do this

t. retarded wagecuck or pretentious student between the age of 15 and 25

Where do you base this on?
I am an outsider so I might have it very wrong. I did spoke with some philosophers.
When I think contemporary philosophy I think of Peter Godfried-Smith, Chalmers and Elijah Millgram.

You are mistaken. Try to call me something else.

So academia has never ignored worthwhile figures?

Philosophy is gay and for betas.

yes

*Doubt*

Only reading.
Veeky Forums knows nothing, John is now.

>Allowing yourself to get cucked by whatever philosophy comes easiest to you (i.e. the prevailing philosophy of your time)

>Marx
>Deleuze
Clearly no ideology behind this post.

You don't "decide" on who is right and who is not in the same way that you don't "decide" what the answer to a math problem is. Reality exists as it does and it is not up for interpretation.

Are you really surprised academia ignores someone who isn't a sycophantic leftist?

?
Then how.

Completely true

t. Germancucks

The devil speaks the truth

this, as others have said

Stop reading philosophers, you're absorbing distilled autism in book form.

...

>Plato
>living his philosophy

I mean I guess if you count that time he tried to put his fucktoy on the throne of Syracuse, but otherwise no.

By that logic, Mainländer was an outstanding philosopher because he killed himself

very simple.

are they greek or german (at the very minimum studied under their respective educational systems)? if yes, then they're good. else, they're shit.

This is excessively True.
BUT there are exceptions.

My only philosophy is fist fighting and rayp

Rarely. Of the major philosopher that got ignored in their lifetime only Nietzsche come to mind, everyone else was at the very least a minor celebrity in their field.

There are lots of far-right/hardcore libertarian/deeply egoistic philosophers in the academia.
That's not why literally no academic cares about JP and SCam HarrTis books.

>you share a board with these people

I owe you thanks, really. I was about to waste a couple of hours here, now I'll read instead.

Holy fuck, there has not been a single good post on this board for half a decade.

Western philosophy:
God tier - Greeks
Great tier - Germans
Okay tier - French
*autistic screeching* - Anglos

watch it, friendo

Why would you say this?

>There are lots of far-right/hardcore libertarian/deeply egoistic philosophers in the academia.

No, no there's not.

Western philosophy:
God tier - Greeks and Latins
Almost God tier - Germans and Italians
Great tier - French and the USA
Okay tier - the rest of Continental Europe
Shit tier - Russian
Hypocritical, useless trash who never amounted to anything - Anglos

ftfy

If they profit from their philosophy or if they speak in public then they are a pseud.

Why single out Russians from the rest of continental Europe? How many Russian philosophers have you read?

Well, I gues that's what people think when they only approach philosophy departments through the accounts of hacks such as Jordan Peterson and Camille Paglia.
There is a leftist bias in almost every phil. department, but to say that's the only thing going on is pathetic and just show that you have NO idea of what you're talking about.

>calling romans 'latin'
>calling stoics 'god tier'
>USA on the chart at all
You have to go back.

>hurr durr ur dum and stoopid

>calling romans 'latin'
I'm Italian and there is nothing wrong in calling them Latins.

>calling stoics 'god tier'
Implying that stoicism is the only philosophic school that came out of the Roman Republic and Empire. That just shows how fucking ignorant are you.

>USA on the chart at all
USA has been extremely relevant in the philosophical discourse of the last 200 years. To say otherwise, again, just shows how ignorant you are.

>There is a leftist bias in almost every phil. department

Yes, exactly, which means precisely that there aren't "alot of right-wing philosophers in academia".

There's literally nothing /pol/ish about that post.
But there are lots of right wing philosophers in the academia, both in our canon and in the present. They are not the majority, but to pretend that every philosopher out there is leftist is laughable.

If they're endorsed by Veeky Forums and born after 1900 they're generally shit.
If they use the term "post-modernism" without qualifying what paradigm of modernity has been superseded they're either shit or a sociologist.

Why can't we post tits on blue boards? Are breasts really that offensive? Is anyone stupid enough to lurk at wurk? Do chantards even have jobs?

I remember in an interview where moot said boobs were ok on blue boards. moot mk2 and his league of hack mods and fuckheaded janitors piss me off

>Germans and Italians

>Yeah, name 3 important Italian philosophers and your opinion may have some grounding. And I say that as an Italian myself.

By reading metaphilosophy. But then you have to tell good metaphilosophers from crappy ones, and it's turtles all the way down. The best way to go about this sort of thing is to read first, then develop your own opinion of what's being said.

You do decide what the answer to a math problem is, user. You get to choose your axioms.

>There are lots of far-right/hardcore libertarian/deeply egoistic philosophers in the academia.

Demonstrably false.
>Other 382 / 931 (41.0%)
>Accept or lean toward: egalitarianism 324 / 931 (34.8%)
>Accept or lean toward: communitarianism 133 / 931 (14.3%)
>Accept or lean toward: libertarianism 92 / 931 (9.9%)

Source: philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl

is right though, just because phil departments lean left doesn't mean that phil is inherently leftist.

>There's literally nothing /pol/ish

I found the term "leftist" offensive as it sounded polemical rather then part of a reasonable discussion.
Maybe next time try "left leaning" or "leftwing bias"

>you're dumb
Not an argument. Romans were okay. USA is irrelevant. Italy is also largely irrelevant, save for the christfaggotry. Stop being delusional, pasta nigger.

There are plenty of very interesting ones, depending on how far you strech "alt right"

>but to pretend that every philosopher out there is leftist is laughable.

The only reason a right-wing philosopher would be considered acceptable in academia was if the Left wanted a pet they could rail against.

You know, someone like Nozick.

>Italy on the same level as Germany

>>Yeah, name 3 important Italian philosophers and your opinion may have some grounding. And I say that as an Italian myself.

Pre-20th century: Tommaso d'Aquino, Giambattista Vico, Machiavelli
Post-21th century: Antonio Gramsci, Norberto Bobbio, Giovanni Gentile

It wasn't in my intentions.

Gotcha, you're baiting.

This is a theory of yours that doesn't account in the slightest for the actual philosophers themselves. You're reducing entire philosophy schools to your cute, naive conspiracy.

>Post-21th century: Antonio Gramsci, Norberto Bobbio, Giovanni Gentile
literally who

>your cute, naive conspiracy.

It's not a conspiracy that academia is overwhelmingly leftist.

>Gramsci
>philosopher
>it's a retard posting

People you know nothing about, since you've never actually studied philosophy.
I could (partially) understand the fact that you don't know who Bobbio is, but are you really clueless about Gramsci and Gentile? That's cute.

>Gramsci
>not one of the most influential communist philosophers of the century
>not the most influential Italian communist philosopher of the century, alongside Toni Negri

not him but -spinoza, macchiavelli, thomas aquinas (just about), pareto maybe.

depends what you mean by italian: if you mean wrote in italian thats a bit unfair because most pre-modern philosophers wrote latin. if you mean born in the state of italy then thats a bit unfair because italy only unified recently. if you mean lived in the italian penisula then we get all the romans and some greek colonies which is a bit of a stretch.

Depends from which vantage point you're standing.....depends which institution you choose to go to.
> leftist

Iol gb2 your safe place you special snowflake

Spinoza was dutch.
Also notice that from the 13th century most Italian philosophers had the same cultural (both philosophical and literary, wich was already nationalist) background, so it makes sense to put them in a continuum.

Unless you're braindead Marxist, there's no excuse for calling Gramsci a philosopher. Also his local historical relevance is nothing comparable even to third tier Germans. Suspend your national pride and see the truth, Giovanni.

not him but stop it, ''leftist'' is not a slut. I can understand ''leftie'', but ''leftist'' is as unoffensive as it gets.

>Unless you're braindead Marxist, there's no excuse for calling Gramsci a philosopher.
Yeah, I guess Marxism did not have any sort of influence in the last 200 years.
>tfw these are the people you have to debate with on Veeky Forums

>Dutch Jew of Portuguese ancestry
>Italian

Shut the fuck up faggot. Everyone knows that you Marxist fucks dominate universities.

Did the philosopher write this book? No? Then he's not a good one.

Marxism has literally nothing contributed to society though

Agamben, Vico, Perniolla

One was a communist hack and the other a diletante fascist. Who gives a shit about them?

Lewl

>Marxists

It's not 1960 anymore you self-pitying manchild.

Suck my dirty, uncircumcised, male member.

>Everyone knows

NOT AN ARGUMENT

hehe

Marxism does have a lot of influence, especially when it comes to the humanities

>Gottlieb Daimler invented ICE and modern cars.
>It had an enormous influence on society.
>Daimler is a great philosopher.
>tfw this is the logic of a person who claims to be an authority on philosophy
kys yourself guido

I guess that Nozick and Ayn Rand are the most important philosophers of the last century, after all.

Who gives a shit about you? Is that actual criticism of their works?
Are you dismissing Gramsci's Prison Books by saying that he was a ''communist hack''? Are you dismissing Gentile revolutionary pedagogy (wich, unaltered to these days, still trumps your pathetic American education) by saying that he is a diletante fascist?
Can't you see that everyone who knows better can't help himself but see you as a pathetic charlatan?

Have I talked about influence on society? Of course i'm talking about influence in the philosophical discourse. You're probably confusing me with the guy who responded to me.

WRONG!

...

>he keeps insisting that Gramsci and Gentile are on the same level as Hegel, Kant, Nietzsche and Heidegger
Calm your tits, macaroni nigger. Nobody gives a fuck about macaroni philosophy beyond Aquinas, Machiavelli, Vico and Croce. Your local memes may be important, but not nearly as much as most Germans or French. Now fuck off.

The fact that you focus on Gramsci and Gentile while ignoring the fact that Machiavelli is one of the founders of modern political philosophy). Also, Vico might have been a minor figure in his days but he has been extremely influential in continental phil ever since his rediscovery.

The philosophy department at my university was primarily concerned with logic.
Maybe if you go to one of those red brick polytechnics you'd find some reds under the bed

>analtistic is acting retarded
gee who would've thought

I'm not ignoring anything. I told you there are 3-4 Italian philosophers of great magnitude. To compare overall body with Germans is laughable. Fucking Frege and Fichte alone are more important to philosophy than the rest of Italians put together.

>He thinks that 2 centuries of good German philosophy mean that everything that is not German is worthless
300 years ago you would have said the same thing about French philosophy. Also keep in mind that literally no real philopher thinks the way you think.

> retards calling retards "retarded"

If you are dumber than them you can't tell.

I didn't claim Italians are worthless, learn to read, bubbah.
>literally no real philopher thinks the way you think
One of you posted the retarded chart, not me.

It wasn't me, in fact I've questioned it directly.

>

Peterson has thousands of citations on his actual scholarly work though.

>how to tell good philosophers from crappy ones?

Become a devotee of whichever philosopher you happen to like the idea of.

t.millennial

>implying Locke isn't garbage

What are some Russian philosophers I actually dont knwo any unless you count novelists like Tolstoy

This guy gets it

if they facilitate thought, are personally stimulating, then they're good. if not, then they're bad

nobody wants to read some autist trying to justify their worldview

partiality is Not a friend of philosophy

Good philosophers don't assume many things and are extremely critical.