Hail the Victorious Dead
A few days ago, Graham Harman suggested listing those one considers to be the 20 greatest Western philosophers of all time. I think such lists would prove to be very interesting, if we could get a number of people to make them, because the relatively small number of slots would force us to make choices and assessments that are in all likelihood very telling of our personal and philosophical quirks. In fact, stating a methodology for choosing would surely be provocative, even without a list. The list itself, however, can be fun to make—and even more fun to read.
I will be making two lists. The first will be my nominees for the 20 Greatest Western Philosophers of All Time, with a brief explanation of the rationale for my choices following the list. My second list will simply include 10 authors I absolutely loathe, which I think is rather self-explanatory (and probably totally unsurprising for those of you who follow my Twitter-based ravings). I hope you enjoy them both, and I’d be interested in your comments (and lists) should you be so kind as to provide them.
The 20 Greatest Western Philosophers Of All Time (Up To This Point In Time, Of Course, After Which All Bets Are Off)
Aquinas, Thomas
Bacon, Francis
Bergson, Henri
Deleuze, Gilles
Eriugena, John Scotus
Freud, Sigmund
Heidegger, Martin
Hume, David
Kant, Immanuel
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm von
Maximos the Confessor, St.
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm
Plato
Pseudo-Dionysios
Sartre, Jean-Paul
Saussure, Ferdinand de
Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph
Spinoza, Baruch
Suarez, Francisco
Uexküll, Jakob Johann von
Now, I’m certain that this list is going to garner a number of what-the-hell-is-wrong-with-you-type comments, so let me make something very clear. This list is comprised of those I consider to be the best Western philosophers, those whose ideas I feel have had and continue to have the greatest fecundity—it is not isomorphic with a list of those that history has graced with the greatest fame and influence. If I were to make that list, it would pretty obviously require the addition of people like Aristotle, Descartes, and Hegel, all of whom I have omitted. Go retake your undergraduate history of philosophy courses if you really need the comfort of that list.
Of course, there are a couple of other potential problems with this list. First, my criteria for choosing might lead you to believe that I simply chose my favorite philosophers. I assure you this is not the case—that, in fact, I strongly dislike about 25% of the philosophers on this list—but you will simply have to take my word for it. Second, there are more than a few on the list whose statuses as philosophers is arguable, to say the least. “Surely”, you might say, “you realize that Freud was a neurologist? Saussure a linguist?” Yes, yes, I know. However, each had some distinctly philosophical ideas that are extremely powerful, with ramifications that extend throughout all of philosophy’s many sub-disciplines.
If the above list didn’t piss you off, I’m sure this next one will:
10 Pricks Who’ve Needlessly Cocked Up Philosophy For Everyone Else
Anselm of Canterbury
Augustine of Hippo, Saint
Berkeley, George
Chisholm, Roderick
Descartes, René
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich
Hobbes, Thomas
Pascal, Blaise
Rand, Ayn
Russell, Bertrand
You may notice that this list is not exactly the polar opposite of the one above. After all, who could say that Hegel’s fruit aren’t ripe for plucking (and making into a pie)? Most of these authors have had some great historical impact (e.g. Augustine, Descartes) or are considered to be important as contemporary figures (e.g. Chisholm), though some definitely have neither point in their favor (I’m talking about you Rand). For one reason or another, I believe that these authors’ ideas are either just particularly egregious on their own or have led others off the clear path and into a dark forest.
I hope this was enjoyable for you all. And by the way, in my book, Timaeus is the greatest Platonic dialogue.
Ugh. That might be the most awkward allusion to Dante ever, Zakk. Way to go.
Oh, I guess I probably should have mentioned, in case it weren’t obvious, that the philosophers are not ranked. I found that much, much too difficult.
Interesting list !!
Though i have always thought that this kind of selective issues must be related with what i like to call “our own path” criteria. What is the path that lead us to read and to understand and love -or hate- some thinkers and authors? Which of them came to our path to solve and answer our most intimate concerns and questions? which of them were force to come to our path to enrich it or to change its direction? what about the authors which thought are not taking us to anywhere but sticking us into an affective black hole? Which of those thinkers are meant to be love as they give us the way to think things by ourselves, as they give us the tools to get to think life, instead of just simply wielding them with no share?
Are we aware enough of such concerns, questions and affections so to go and embrace their thought and their taught? Which authors are not giving it all into their system, which of them are not willing to be love and comprehended? what is that we are willing to respond of our experience in life that could connect us with such authors, with the systems of their particular thoughts, with the responses their work offer us, and that could make us disparage others, so to filter them from our path and to leave them alone on the oblivion of history? Who are we serving when we get close to a particular system of thought? Are we reading them because such authors are proclaimed as must-read, despite they would not bring anything to our philosophical sake, though we find nothing lovable in their work? Are we doing philosophy or just reproducing and reinforcing obsolete conceptualizations?
OK, anyway..Making such a list might be very problematic for someone whose approximation with authors is affectively stressed by all this kind of concerns. But responding and orienting affectively all this concerns its helpful to clear out the intimate relations that we might have with the thinkers that come in our way, and that would let us walk our path as we are integrating them into our system and experience. To my mind, that would be the primordial criteria to make my selection.
A terrible list. The concept of good or bad lists makes little sense and I’ll not comment on how and why I think the names are wrong apart from saying that noticably not a single woman… Sometimes I despair at what they teach as philosophy and this list demonstrates evrything that is wrong with current philosophical pedeagogic practice.
Now rewite the list with 50% women, then redo it again with 50% non-western philosophers.
best steve
And a resounding condemnation.
Perhaps it is a fault that I did not list any women, but that would be more of a fault with my education than with my intentions, as I would be hard-pressed to list a handful of female philosophers that (1) I know anything about and (2) are in the league of those mentioned above. And a few of those I might mention are still alive, which, as you might have gathered from the title of this entry, would’ve violated the terms I set for myself in making the list. In any case, I don’t see myself as obligated to reach some quota for either sex. Maybe this will just prove to you (as you said elsewhere) that I “unconsciously think the world is male” (a bizarre and potentially offensive complaint that smells of smear tactics rather than thoughtful critique), but I was mostly worrying whether the philosophers I listed had noteworthy enough ideas rather than perseverating over some imaginary sexism I might display. I mean, most of the list is white, too. Should I have included non-white philosophers to appease whatever perverse gods you serve?
Despite my generally derisive tone, I would be interested in suggestions for female nominees to be added to this list, if only so that I might fill in an area of knowledge that is sorely lacking.
As for adding non-western (particularly Indian, Chinese, and Japanese) philosophers to the list, I would very much have liked to do so—in fact, I struggled to keep the constraint of Western philosophy intact. In the end, I decided to make things simpler by following the rough pattern Graham described in the post I linked to. If it were simply a list of the greatest philosophers of all time, I can assure you it would have been a much different list. Though perhaps still all male, ’cause that’s the way I manifest my repressed sexism.
Aw, jeez, I can’t help myself.
I’m having a hard time reconciling this—”A terrible list.”—with this— “The concept of good or bad lists makes little sense”. Incoherent much?