[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 94 KB, 650x808, ayn-rand-1957.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967096 No.6967096 [Reply] [Original]

Have there been any American philosophers of note?
Is Ayn Rand really the best they have to offer?

>> No.6967098

>>6967096
xD

>> No.6967102

>>6967096
>those guns

>> No.6967105
File: 864 KB, 160x270, 1401142967621.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967105

>America
>philosophy

>> No.6967108

handsome chap.

>> No.6967185

>>6967096
Emerson
Thoreau
Peirce and other pragmatists tbh

>> No.6967201
File: 63 KB, 871x350, 1420595550383.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967201

ebin memes dude

>> No.6967227

American philosopher are really stubborn people. They have shit-tier like Quine, Chomsky or Nozick

>> No.6967234

>Ayn Rand
>American

But no, there haven't been. Maybe some of the founding fathers who influenced France.

>> No.6967236

>>6967096
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:American_philosophers

>> No.6967303

>>6967096
Implying any post-Kantian philosophy has had anything of worth to offer

>> No.6967334 [DELETED] 

>>6967236
All the jews and Poles hoooooly

>> No.6967671

>>6967334

what did you expect, native Americans?

>> No.6967681

Literally nobody has mentioned Rawls? He's the most famous ethicist of the past 40 years.

>> No.6967723

"Wild" Bill James is the great American philosopher, in my opinion.

>> No.6967725

>>6967096
We're not known as a nation of naval-gazers.

>> No.6967728

bell hooks

>> No.6967734
File: 181 KB, 838x983, 1439003201607.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967734

>>6967681
probably because this is a shitpost thread

>> No.6967741
File: 31 KB, 500x333, 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967741

>American philosophers

>> No.6967759
File: 142 KB, 330x302, what's the matter. aint ya never seen a satyr before.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967759

>>6967096
>Ayn Rand
>American

>> No.6967769

William James

>> No.6967813

>>6967096
Pragmatists, namely Dewey.

>> No.6967823
File: 856 KB, 3429x4286, Murray_Bookchin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967823

Murray Bookchin

This mofo is probably the most influential American socialist in recent history. He is right up there with Emma Goldman in level of importance.

>> No.6967841

>>6967823
Your sonnenmensch is a filthy obscurantist.

>> No.6967870

>>6967841
Well, your ubermensch is disgustingly retrogressive.

>> No.6967890

>>6967759
Fucking THANK YOU.

>> No.6967908
File: 15 KB, 553x351, 1334533377126.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6967908

>no one has mentioned Kripke

>> No.6967987

>>6967185
Peirce is the fucking man

>> No.6967989

Emerson and Thoreau.
People like Spooner/A J Nock/Browson for political stuff.
C S Pierce was surprising. Very "logic" oriented but still not a philistine tryhard unlike those that would follow the analytic philosophy bandwagon.
William James is fine enough.

And of course Sam Harris.

>> No.6968008

>>6967823
A red? Ew.

>> No.6968022

Second to none in ugliness

>> No.6968040

quine
kripke
putnam

just because /lit/ doesn't know anything about analytic philosophy doesn't mean that america hasn't produced anyone worthwhile.

>> No.6968052

>>6967096
How do typical tumblerina deal with the fact that the only women that at least tried (don't mean they managed) to have a personal philosophical outlook are
-an über edgy shitlady (feminine of shitlord) Rand
-a devout Catholic traditional wife Ancombe?

>> No.6968070

>>6968052
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt

>> No.6968094

>>6968070
That's a political polemist at best.
And even in this reduced settting there is no systematic Adendt thinking.

Finally she doesn't really fit the tumblerina narrative either.

>> No.6968106

>>6967989

I'l give you Emerson.

The rest are irrelevant or pseudo-philosophy.

>>6968040

Kripke and Putnam are way more influential than they should be. Quine and Davidson are imo the two greatest 20th century american philosophers

>> No.6968107

>>6967823
>Bookchin
thoroughly exposed as a an authoritarian hypocritical hack and destroyed by Black in "Anarchy after leftism". died having accomplished nothing, alienating everyone in the radical spectrum

Thoreau and Peirce as mentioned before. B.F. Skinner, like him or not, is definitely of note

>> No.6968113

>>6968106
I haven't read enough Kripke but I really dig his theory on truth. Why do you feel he is 'overrated', so to speak? (I don't care about Putnam, love Quine, and haven't read Davidson tbh).

>> No.6968114

>>6968094

Arendt is more influential than you think, especially in political science, her idea of the distinction between the social and the political is worshiped everywhere.

Personally I don't like her very much since she is too anti-Marxist and worships Heidegger's ontology too much.

>> No.6968134

>>6968113

I don't really have a beef with Kripke, in fact I like how he btfo the descriptivist thesis and explained belief. But I feel analytic philosophy has moved so little past him over the last 40 years. everything revolves around Wittgenstein and semantics/language games. It's really boring at this point.

>> No.6968140

>>6968114
I meant she only wrote about politics, and about a reduced number of subjects.
She didn't even try to be Kant like Rand did.

And you saying she is too anti-Marxist is typically what would alienate her from the SJW. µOr her saying the holocaust is almost irrelevant. Or her saying the American Revolution was a success but the French one a disaster.

Last but not least
>being unironically Marxist

>> No.6968154

>>6968140

>Being unironicaly a conservacuck.

But in all seriousness even her political philosophy is not that good, even apart from the outrageous statements you have just mentioned, she completely misunderstood what the Greek polis and democracy was all about. And her distinction between the political and the social is a fucking tragedy in political thought.

>> No.6968159

>>6968134
>It's really boring at this point.
Haha, from my limited exposure I'd agree, aside from contemporary metaphysics, which has gone so far up its own asshole that it is basically just trying to see what insane systems we can think up that are logically consistent.

>> No.6968182

>>6968154
>And her distinction between the political and the social is a fucking tragedy in political thought.
I agree that Arendt is very lame about this even though it is supposed to be a central point with her.

Though I think you would be triggered by the distinction of public and private law or between dominion and imperium.
>This is what happens when writers go on their political rant whithout any ground in law
>Marx for instance tbh
The Romans were right.

>> No.6968225

Anglo countries all have shit philosophers tbh
Still I like Emerson and Kripke
We have the same problem as Britain though, in that our philosophers are either autistic analytics or complete edgelords

>> No.6968264

>>6968225
So many based perfidious Albion Britbros, from Anselme, Duns Scot or Bacon to Hobbes, Berkeley and Bradley.

There are still people like C S Lewis taht woulodn't fit in either "autistic analytics" nor "complete edgelords". You still really got cucked by the analytic kool aid.
I blame Moore.