Best female philosophers

anscombe nigga

JK Rowling

>being more retarded than a harry potter reader
grats (You)

Susanne K. Langer: "Philosophy in a New Key. A Study in the Symbolism of Reason, Rite, and Art"

>Symbols are not proxy for their objects, but are vehicles for the conception of objects. To conceive a thing or a situation is not the same thing as to "react toward it" overtly, or to be aware of its presence. In talking about things we have conceptions of them, not the things themselves; and it is the conceptions, not the things themselves; and it is the conceptions, not the things, that symbols directly "mean." Behavior toward conceptions is what words normally evoke; this is the typical process of thinking.

beatriz preciado, just for giving a presentable form to butlers monstrosity.

Come on, that's not fair.

SAME

Weil's really good, but she's intense. She gave me a nervous breakdown lmao :)

Women aren't capable of psychology let alone philosophy

you forgot the [redpill][/redpill] tags, white brother

Prove me wrong; [redpill]you literally can't[/redpill]

Literature is meritocratic subject. It doesn't matter if you're male or female, the realm of philosophers is forever closed to you by virtue of your willful ignorance of canon. I'd tell you to kill yourself but it would release your Dan Brown and Stephen King collection into circulation again.

Hypatia of Alexandria

or Anne Conway

or Simone Weil

or Catherine Clement

or Mary Midgley, but she's more of a public intellectual at this point. Lady consistently humiliates pseuds like Richard Dawkins. Muh hero.

>hypatia
lol why?

Because I've read all of her books. Very hard to find, but they're great. ;-)

i miss the guro board too, liaranon.

I dunno. I mean, I really wish there was something out there. Maybe we can read what she wrote in the Akashic Records?

come on user, you like she got skinned, just like mishima loved st sebastian for getting shot.

OP asked for best female philosophers, not absolute fucking flaming retards.

the GOAT here, reporting for duty.

Nope, I just wonder what she did to get the christians all whipped up and commit perhaps one of their first acts of absolute hypocrisy. She must've done something pretty cool. Maybe theurgy? I dunno.

There is no woman recognized in the classic philosophical tradition.

>liking the philosopher whose only solid life story evidence we have is that she probably got skinned or beaten with tiles
>oh no user I like her for other reasons
not buying it. you hope it translates as they scraped her flesh with oyster shells. just admit it.

>krates/hipparxia isn't classic
>asspia doesn't count
wtf did you get an edited mormon version of the classics where they took out all the women?

Nope. I'm EXTREMELY interested in Neoplatonism (Proclus, Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus, Damascius), etc.. This was VERY cool stuff. It seems like near the end, they were trying to cover something up. Like maybe someone had really figured something out. Maybe Hypatia was the missing link? Sorry for the /x/ tier post, but yea.

Don't know why you're being so gross. You're probably trolling, but idc.

You're ignoring the only facts about her for fantasy which has no bearing in the course of philosophy or history. Why you chose the female philosopher who got skinned alive by Jews and left no works over any other female philosopher of the era who left no works but wasn't brutally murdered is the most relevant question to your choice. Your phantasm about neoplatonism is because you chose her for being the one that got skinned over being one of the ones who just left no written record, not because there aren't other missing neoplatonists. You picked her for having her skin scraped clean by oyster wielding crowds, because she has no other feature which would elevate her above the other lost works.

Who are Krates/Hipparxia and Asspia? I can't find any information on them.

You're the one who's fixating on some weird oyster shell thing that doesn't even show up in any of the accounts I'm aware of.

And do you know of other SIGNIFICANT missing neoplatonists, who also supposedly made major contributions to natural philosophy? Pray tell...

Or are you just obsessed with this death/torture thing that you repeatedly mention as though it were some kind of access code. Grow up. Learn to manage your transference.

>Who are Krates/Hipparxia and Asspia? I can't find any information on them.
AND HE WANTS ME TO BELIEVE HE CAN INTO NEOPLATONISM! KEKEKEKEKEKE

You're here for the gore, you filthy hentai wanker. Hipparchia's a female cynic philosopher we have more information on, like Krates, her husband. They're considered founders of the cynics. It's a movement you might have heard about in all that in depth reading of wikipedia indices you did.

Asspia is the favourite whore of Solon, who is the man who invented Athenian Democracy. You might have heard about that, too, in your in depth study of neoplatonism, between the stories you like best about having your body smashed by roofing tiles. She's famous because she made him cry in court.

Hey, congrats! If you keep posting, you might even let some content slip!

>They're considered founders of the cynics
1)Diogenes was le first cynic
2)cynicism=/=neoplatonism

What a goofus.

Ayn Rand
/thread.

Okokokokok,

I admit. I'm a pseud. I don't actually read philosophy. I just play with myself to MLP while snorting redpills all day.

diogenes and krates are contemporaries. only some of krates works did survive and diogenes did not, and neither of them are women, unlike hipparchia, who, again, is a fellow founder. one of the reasons they couldn't invent the kind of cynicism she did is because male and female shame are different in athens. (note: diogenes was not as shameless as hipparchia because he would have lost his citizenship. it's why there's so many anecdotes about him where they're careful to point out he's not gay)

you don't know major figures of basic schools of philosophy, so you're deluding yourself if you think anyone's buying you're better read than a first year phil student and first year phil students are retarded stoners.

more lecturing your dumb ass who loves chick getting torn apart with shells and their skin scraped down (for neo - platonism of course kek)
>cynics aren't neo platonists
kekekeke this is too much you can't even read a quote chain.
>There is no woman recognized in the classic philosophical tradition.
>
>>krates/hipparxia isn't classic
>>asspia doesn't count
>wtf did you get an edited mormon version of the classics where they took out all the women?

do you see a mention of neo platonism? no? because it's about women in the classical tradition, which is not limited to the one story you like about a chick who left no philosophy or history other than a gore story you regularly get off to. it encompasses the classical tradition, of which hipparchia helped start a whole movement instead of just getting sad fucks like you who don't read to wank over her death by angry mob on their wikipedia page like your waifu, the dead and scraped with oysters hypatia.

it's very clear you either really like gore, or you read her name on a list and thought "HAHA I'LL SAY THAT AND PEOPLE WILL THINK I'M SMART". I'm guessing this is after namedropping Proust turned out to mean you're a faggot who likes being raped, not a literary ladies' man. It's obviously you didn't even do the background work of knowing who Plato's contemporaries were before deciding to barrel into a supporting a school than relies on references to both his and other schools contemporary to him. Nobody who cares about these things to impress them with your complete lack of knowledge wouldn't spot it. Fake it to people who don't read books; they're probably as interested in talking neoPlatonism with an idiot and won't point out you're worse on the history of philosophy than a teenage girl who read Sophie's World.

Damaris Cudworth Masham

>female
>philosopher

pick one

i pick st teresa of avila. where do i pick her up?

not a philosopher

>finally someone someone else citing its work

are u from Barcelona?

that did not stop her being a female. go talk in a thread where either/or problems are harder for people, i'm waiting for my qt mystic gf in christ.

ugh, i literally rolled my eyes user
grow up

>this whole post
>judging
kekekeke you can always tell when people come from places where content doesn't mean shit. user's funposting about literature. (You) are a pathetic (You)hound who would trade a hundred hours of competence for ten minutes clapping.

...wtf

(You) are the double-headed Antichrist. Begone!

This is the only true answer. Anscombe is a genius, and Wittgenstein wishes he could have written something as good as Intention.

Lucas avenged him.

They aren't part of the classic tradition. Here is a list of who would be:

Thales
Anaximander
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Anaxagoras
Democritus
Empedocles
Socrates
Plato
Aristotle
Descartes
Spinoza
Kant
Schopenhauer
Hegel
Kierkegaard
Nietzsche

>DUDE, LIKE, LOVE EACH OTHER. PEACE!
>proceeds to get shot in the street like a dog
>isn't even female
>best female philosophers
kek.

Hannah Arendt

Sappho

She really is the only remarkable female philosopher. What a wonderful mind.

This is a horrible list and you should feel really embarassed.

nigguh if you don't put Leibniz on that shit right now

Arendt, de Beauvoir, Butler, Kristeva, de Lauretis, Anna Freud (maybe Elena Croce too), Rand, Émilie du Chatelet, Luise d'Epinay, Marie Gauzes, Marinelli, Montessori.

>Mary Midgley

I can't take anyone seriously who supports the gaia hypothesis, which is basically hippes trying to legitimize pagan religion as science.

Give me a good reason why it's bad. The Pre-Socratics are listed and rightly so, since they make up the foundation of philosophy. The rest are all the essential "big hitters" who learned from one another and started with the Greeks.

>Socrates and Plato
....wut?

Crates and Hipparchia are definitely basic canon, but maybe you should take up that wandering into volcanoes thing of Empedocles and respawn to get over writing that list in this life. A list with Xenophon on it would be a bit less like you had decided the total amount of namedrops you need for Veeky Forums, but that whole list is one long WTF.

Socrates and Plato aren't the same person. There are different ideas to their names.

...

>They aren't part of the classic tradition

According to whom?

The philosophers themselves.

Ayn Rand

Which philosophers? In what books?

Yes, especially if you read Xenophon. Are you really too dumb to tell why user was perplexed and rightfully suspicious? Even more if you read Aristophanes. that's a hint to read more

>spoonfeed me
No. Nietzsche alone more or less names all of them there, and few others, and a list without him is a joke list.

I think it's according to user's headmates that are philosophers.

Most books on the cynics have half the book as Crates/Pseudcrates or Aristippus and half as Diogenes anecdotes. He'd really have to try to find a way of hearing of one but not the other.

I don't see what you are getting at. Socrates and Plato belong on the list, regardless of Xenophon or Aristophanes. It seems to me that you're focusing on something that's highly irrelevant here.

it's Paul B. Preciado nowadays

It shows your categorization is built on memes, not reading or speaking to anyone in the discipline.

It's like someone who pronounces it Camuss trying to convince you they read The Plague in the original. Like there's a consensus pronunciation for Camus, there's a consensus on canon which you don't adhere to. That you haven't had anyone make a wat??? face at you for that list and can't see why it would make people familiar with canon do that is a sign of how removed from discussion you are.

>ctrl+f
>no sasha gray
Veeky Forumsiamdisappoint.jpg

YES
E
S

ANSCOMBE
N
S
C
O
M
B
E

You're an idiot. The fact that I am telling you off says that it's not "built on memes". If it was, I would bend over backwards for every idiot like you that passed by and it would include every less essential philosopher name dropped in these threads, rather than the core as I see it, which is based on my reading of them.

>female
>PHILOSOPHER

Fall can't come soon enough

>implying that I am a summerfag
lmfao

Taylor Swift

Shakira is sligtly better tho

I like how se approaches the existential reality with the analogue to mountains and boobs. Like all this physical being of ours is derived solely from the natural highness that closely relates controversial facts of movements which still is defined as sokal lying

The core as you see it does not relate to the core taught in philosophy, or even by those philosophers. You drop Socrates, but not Isocrates. That means you're not even qualified to talk about philosophy in Hamlet to English students, let alone qualified to make out a philosophy survey course for phil students, even if they were freshers. Calling me an idiot will not change canon nor make you right. In fact, it makes you more retarded because you just proved you contradict your own case which you cannot recognise as the case.

lol it was bound to happen

María Zambrano.
I'm surprised any of the snobs know her.

>You drop Socrates, but not Isocrates
Are you kidding me? Isocrates has not been an object of heavy critique and citation by other philosophers to the extent that Socrates has been, not even close.

Please, PLEASE, tell me you're joking...

This
and Eleonore Stump

The only female philosophers that aren't trash

The reason why I mentioned Isocrates and Hamlet is because the entirety of Polonius' speech about what to learn in life to Laertes is from Isocrates' letters, and because Isocrates is one of the ten Attic orators. I'm doing some meta-humour you don't get, because Polonius is offering advice that is unknowingly trite which he holds in high regard because it's coming out his mouth, and because even Attic canon and Socrates disagrees with you. It works on many levels, you see. Pseud.

Nice digits, but you're not talking about philosophy anymore. You're talking about scholarly study. There is a difference, and my list was never meant to cater to that.

I am talking about philosophy. Isocrates' tutors include Gorgias, and you can't get through Plato's version of Socrates without that, and Plato's Socrates is a very biased one which you're meant to add the other two sources to if you want to talk about a potential Socrates. This is first year first term shit that you do not know while also claiming to be the arbiter of canon. That is how much of a pseud dilettante arrogant cunt you are. And yeah, the numbers are good.

Not really a philosopher, but still deserving of mention.

her philippics are top tier.

Nobody gives a shit about greeks other than Heraclitus, Parmenides, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus and Porphiry familia.
And your list after the greeks is even worse somehow.

You're saying to include secondary sources — and they ARE secondary, regardless if they are a necessary prerequisite for understanding all of the little nuances in the primary works — on a list that is meant to be only the primary voices. That is what a scholar does, not a philosopher. This is "first year first term" shit among the philosophers.

My list ends with Nietzsche because that is as far as I've read and found to be worthwhile (read Wittgenstein, Foucault and Sartre, none of which felt like a proper evolution from Nietzsche), but of what I have read, and I've mostly just read the primary works, those were the individuals who appeared at the top, in the tradition to me. I've mostly just read the primary works precisely because they are the primary works, and because I am only interested in philosophy, not in unending scholarly study so I can grasp the tiniest nuances that have little bearing on the big picture. You might know more than me, but you don't necessarily know as well as I do. And I know that neither of us know as well as these philosophers, like Nietzsche for example, who cites the Pre-Socratics I list, as well as Socrates, and ONLY them, as being "monolithic archetypes" which all proceeding philosophy has been based on and rehashed from. He does not ever cite the likes of individuals like Crates, Hipparchia, or Isocrates.

Overall, I'm not sure what your point ever was. I think you thought that I meant that no one not on that list is not worth reading, but that's not true.

Never heard of her

The reason why Isocrates is what Polonius tells his kid is because it's such common learning. The reason why classical authors also include him in canon against you wishes is because canon does not give a shit about your list or your opinions. Crying more won't help, not knowing who Crates was at all was the sign you don't even know what you don't know. You've been proving it since.

You don't like that label? Ok. How about SummerHomo?