Philosopher Deathmatch/Fight

[CandleLite]

with only skimming thru the 1st bit of the artical i put it to you if they only interviewd and quoted those dissatisfied with him. if so would it not be a biased account? also i did not find the clames you made against him, admitedly haveing only read the 1st 1/6 and skimmed 3/5 of the way down the atricle

[Nesterus]

I am going to steer this conversation away as you fellas are going to crash this thread into the side of a mountain if I dont


Cheeseburgers


big juicy cheeseburgers

[Hypothetical]

Heh, that's why I stopped replying...

I can haz cheezburgher? Wif lots of onions and some bakan pleez?

[abracax]

Hypothetical, the person you chose is not a philosopher so there for does not qualify for this contest.

[joemanf]

lol, I was reading this, and I was going to say "We need Conrad back in here to fix this" until I read Abra's post.
Nicly done!
Oh, and I'm gona sit this one out. Philosophy's not my best subject

[Elsworth]

I apologize as I have not made myself clear in the introductory description. My contender #1 being Immanuel Kant has to be counterattacked by another philosopher that relates to him in any manner.

Example: Immanuel Kant stressed rationality (Enlightenment Period); he could be countered by Jean-Jacques Rousseau (precursor to the Age of European Romanticism), Friedrich Schiller (Kantian disciple of the Kantian dichotomy between mind and body; nature and reason although he departed from certain Kantian concepts as he offered greater sentimentality and emotionality, or of the human experiences), Friedrich Nietzsche (believed that the Kantian tradition was outdated and incomplete and did not succinctly express daily human affairs/life/experiences), etc.

In addition, please provide relevant images correlating to the specific/particular philosopher.

ENGLISH, please.

Heh, sorry, just didn't understand any word you said other then 'he', 'be', and 'in'.

[Heraclius]

I dunno Els, that was pretty plain English to me. I'll hop into this once I get back from the grandparent's house tonight.

[CHiH]

This is an interesting thread, I'll have to jump in now at the point the thread is currently at.

Looking for an absurdist philosopher, be back next tuesday.

[Kailrik]

I would reply, but... Well, this goes beyond my mind's abilities to compute.

I'll try, though.

Brigham Young (not sure if he qualifies, but he is the only guy I could find)

Second Leader of the Church of Latter-day Saints, also called the Mormons.

He also ended up being the first governor of Utah.

[Conrad_Jalowski]

Contender #3:



Bertrand Russell




Friedrich Nietzsche, your concepts on aesthetic theory through the tragedic concepts of the Apollonian [intellectual effervescence, enlightened thought, rationality] and Dionysian [drunk stupor, irrationality, licentiousness, bacchanalian revelries] dichotomy will dissipate to the analytic philosophical tradition of Bertrand Russell which stresses the inimical stance to any sweeping philosophical systems with the preference for the natural sciences, a succinct expression of philosophical tenets as opposed to the obfuscation of philosophical concepts/tenets, etc.


Here is a brief overview of the philosophical viewpoints/traditions regarding the external realm/world in reference to social/political relations that I have assorted and arranged through my understanding of the Western Tradition of philosophical thought:

(Some philosophical schools of thought divide the philosophical tradition to this tripartite viewpoint)

1) Realist Tradition:
Thucydidean System-> Thucydides, Machiavelli, Hobbes, Morgenthau, Immanuel Wallenstein, Clausewitz

2) Rationalist Tradition:
Grotian System-> Hugo Grotius

3) Revolutionary Tradition:
Kantian System-> Immanuel Kant