Skip to main content

Listing philosophers



Today is my 66th birthday.  I continue to work steadily, receiving no social security money.  (You are welcome, younger taxpaying workers.) I will celebrate by asking myself an arbitrary question. 

 "Who are the most influential philosophers of the 18th and 19th century?" 

And I will answer it with some context-free listing of philosophers, attributing the choice of names to what unnamed authorities "consider" to be the case. Let's go. 

On the continent of Europe? Christian Wolff, Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, Auguste Comte, Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche all come to mind.

The British isles? George Berkeley, David Hume, Thomas Reid, Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, Thomas Carlyle fit the bill.

North America? Ah, there’s Jonathan Edwards, Benjamin Franklin, R.W. Emerson, Margaret Fuller, C.S. Peirce, and William James.

Anywhere else? You pays your money and you takes your choice. 


Fuller is the only name among those 18 that might seem a non-canonical intrusion. So I have put her photo above. Fuller's significance will be worth a separate post, perhaps as early as next week.  


But I do think it is a fun fact that among those 18 names I have included both participants in one of the most famous exchanges in philosophic history.


"I accept the universe."  -- Fuller


"By Gad, she'd better!" - Carlyle. urchoic

Comments

  1. Christopher, there are two names on your list I don't know about: Christian Wolff and Thomas Reid. I would have replaced them with, respectively, Arthur Schopenhauer and John Stuart Mill, both of whom were highly influential.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Henry, Thank you for the birthday wish. As to Reid, I think he has had great influence as the first to make certain important criticisms of the nihilistic side of Humeanism. As to Wolff, as you probably know, he is of importance chiefly as a human bridge between Leibniz and the early Kant. Leibniz, despite HIS great influence, is not on our list because he is more a late 17th century figure. Anyway, on that one I concede your point. Though Wolff has that historic importance, Schopenhauer may have more.

      Delete
  2. Christopher, since, as I said, I am unfamiliar with Reid, I am not in a position to compare his level of influence with Mill's. But I can quote this from the Wikipedia article on Mill: "One of the most influential thinkers in the history of liberalism, he contributed widely to social theory, political theory, and political economy. Dubbed 'the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century' by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy...." Perhaps, though, Mill's influence was primarily on political thinking rather than on academic philosophy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stanford Encyclopedia also has a good piece on Reid

      Delete
  3. How indebted is J. S. Mill to Wilhelm von Humboldt for the foundational ideas of Liberalism?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know. So ignorant am I, in fact, that when I first read your question I thought of a different Humboldt entirely -- Wilhelm's brother Alexander. But Alexander, who wrote a lot, about many subjects especially biology and geography, didn't write anything that could have had the consequence you describe. When I DID get my Humboldt brothers straightened out, though, and I did a tiny bit of research, I realized that you have a point. Beyond that, I will only say that I like to give a lot of credit to Benjamin Constant, whose "Liberty of Ancients and Moderns" certainly contributed to the development of liberalism in the Millian sense well before Mill caught on to it.

      Delete
  4. According to Wikipedia, "In 1804, Alexander von Humboldt visited the United States and expressed the idea that slavery was not a good way to treat citizens; this was during Thomas Jefferson's presidency. Humboldt's ideas were expanded by the following generation of American politicians, writers, and clergymen, among them Abraham Lincoln and Ralph Waldo Emerson." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_slavery_in_the_United_States

    Wikipedia's article on Alexander von Humboldt himself states that some scholars claim "that Humboldt dedicated large parts of his work to describing the conditions of slaves, indigenous peoples, mixed-race castas, and society in general. He often showed his disgust for the slavery and inhumane conditions in which indigenous peoples and others were treated and he often criticized Spanish colonial policies."

    Thus, Alexander von Humboldt did share with Mill an opposition to slavery. Mill's Wikipedia article states that he expressed it in his essay "The Subjection of Women."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers