Your five least favorite philosophers

[they don't love you like i love you]

Nietzsche
Ayn Rand
Leo Strauss
Plato
St. Augustine

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Most metaphysicians rank rather low in my esteem. If I needed to choose just five:

Aristotle
Plato
Socrates
Descartes
Berkeley

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Derrida, Bentham & The Logical Positivists would have to be included. Haven't read much to comment otherwise. (Even then my Bentham comment is more about my reactions to utilitarianism than anything Bentham actually wrote).

I don't consider Ayn Rand a philosopher.

[anvi]

The author of the Bhagavad Gita
F.W.J. Schelling
Plato (in the late works)
Georges Bataille
Vasubandhu

[True Democrat]

Nietzsche, and only Nietzsche

[pbrower2a]

Alfred Rosenberg, "philosopher" of Nazism.
Karl Marx.
Friedrich Nietzsche.
Arthur Schopenhauer.
Ayn Rand.

[Earth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

[The Mikado]

I will say this for Bentham: he designed one hell of a prison.

[Verily]

     Most metaphysicians rank rather low in my esteem. If I needed to choose just five:

Aristotle
Plato
Socrates
Descartes
Berkeley

To be fair to Socrates, we know literally nothing about his own views. You can hate Plato all you want, of course.

Hmm... this is tough. I'd probably come up with a list of somewhat obscure metaphysicians if I actually tried to do a list of my own. I actually have affection for most of the philosophers mentioned previous. Some of those listed aren't philosophers, of course (Rand, Marx, Rosenberg).

I suppose I hate Kant because he couldn't write and has made generations suffer through reading what he vomited onto a page.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Most metaphysicians rank rather low in my esteem. If I needed to choose just five:

Aristotle
Plato
Socrates
Descartes
Berkeley

To be fair to Socrates, we know literally nothing about his own views. You can hate Plato all you want, of course.

     True enough. I was working under the assumption that what Plato attributed to him was accurate, but aside from being an unfounded assumption, if that is the case then it would undermine my basis for hating Plato.

[A18]

What's with the Aristotle hatred? And good grief; why hasn't anyone mentioned Hegel yet?

For the record, it's doubtful whether The Republic was intended to be a serious blueprint for government.

[anvi]

I'm with you on this one; Aristotle was a magnificent philosopher, whose acheivements are rivaled by few others in the history of the Western tradition.  Ordinarily, I would hate Hegel, but he was, like my grandparents, Swabian, so on behalf of the home team, I have no choice but to give him a pass.

[phk]

St. Augustine
al-Ghazali
Plato
Derrida
Ruollah Khomeini

[Speed of Sound]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

[Associate Justice PiT]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

[Associate Justice PiT]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

[12th Doctor]

Really, just about all the Continental philosophers from the Enlightenment to the Industrial Era are pretty abysmal in my opinion.

[Torie]

Nietzsche
Ayn Rand
Leo Strauss
Plato
St. Augustine

What is your problem with Leo Strauss, BRTD? You don't you like his penetrating analysis of Machiavellli or something?

I would have to list Marx, Nietzsche, Plato, St. Paul and Mohammed (to the extent the latter two are deemed  philosophers).

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

Ah yes. Though Descartes didn't invent the Ontological argument (that would be St. Anselm of Canterbury), but the argument was indeed silly and circular.

[Associate Justice PiT]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

Ah yes. Though Descartes didn't invent the Ontological argument (that would be St. Anselm of Canterbury), but the argument was indeed silly and circular.

     Not to mention it was founded on the bizarre notion of there being "degrees of perfection" or of existence being more perfect than non-existence (how would one even begin to compare existence & non-existence in terms of "perfection?").

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

Ah yes. Though Descartes didn't invent the Ontological argument (that would be St. Anselm of Canterbury), but the argument was indeed silly and circular.

     Not to mention it was founded on the bizarre notion of there being "degrees of perfection" or of existence being more perfect than non-existence (how would one even begin to compare existence & non-existence in terms of "perfection?").

I just finished reading this an hour ago so it is fresh in my mind but all I can say is that I think in general it is a scholastic inheritance: must of his ideas about 'causes' seem to come from Aristotle despite his dislike of him (or it could just be that Descartes felt he needed God as to avoid accusations of atheism  - I'm not too sure of this myself though I have heard it before but he seems to rely an awful lot on God for his thesis.)

[Associate Justice PiT]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

Ah yes. Though Descartes didn't invent the Ontological argument (that would be St. Anselm of Canterbury), but the argument was indeed silly and circular.

     Not to mention it was founded on the bizarre notion of there being "degrees of perfection" or of existence being more perfect than non-existence (how would one even begin to compare existence & non-existence in terms of "perfection?").

I just finished reading this an hour ago so it is fresh in my mind but all I can say is that I think in general it is a scholastic inheritance: must of his ideas about 'causes' seem to come from Aristotle despite his dislike of him (or it could just be that Descartes felt he needed God as to avoid accusations of atheism  - I'm not too sure of this myself though I have heard it before but he seems to rely an awful lot on God for his thesis.)

     The overreliance on God is also the reason that I put Berkeley on the list. While I think idealism definitely has its merits, Berkeley argues a reductio ad absurdum, ultimately requiring the existence of God for his argument to actually make sense.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

What exactly is the problem with Nietzsche?

I don't particularly have a "least favorite", it's interesting to read their work. If I had to go with one I disagree most with, I might pick Hobbes. I'd go with Rand, but she wasn't a philosopher.

Most people get the Nietzsche they've heard about and the Nietzsche that actually existed confused.

You're almost correct: Most people have never even bothered to realize that there is a Nietzsche that actually existed.

     Yep. The connection that many people infer between him & the Nazis is especially humorous when you realize that except for his bizarre hatred of democracy & women, he was to the left of the left when it came to social issues (or it was likely that he was; he wasn't that much of a political writer).

... and if you read those bits more clearly you realize that he wasn't being 100% serious either (or rather that it was his 'perspective' not truth).

Btw PiT, I'm currently reading The Meditations for college, why Descartes (on this list)?

     There are too many philosophers that I kind of like, kind of dislike & too many that I don't know about to be able to come up with five that I really can't stand.

     Descartes was largely because of the sheer silliness of his ontological proof of God, as well as his statement of "I think therefore I am," which was later attacked by Lichtenburg. I'm probably not familiar enough with other things that Descartes did, though.

Ah yes. Though Descartes didn't invent the Ontological argument (that would be St. Anselm of Canterbury), but the argument was indeed silly and circular.

     Not to mention it was founded on the bizarre notion of there being "degrees of perfection" or of existence being more perfect than non-existence (how would one even begin to compare existence & non-existence in terms of "perfection?").

I just finished reading this an hour ago so it is fresh in my mind but all I can say is that I think in general it is a scholastic inheritance: must of his ideas about 'causes' seem to come from Aristotle despite his dislike of him (or it could just be that Descartes felt he needed God as to avoid accusations of atheism  - I'm not too sure of this myself though I have heard it before but he seems to rely an awful lot on God for his thesis.)

     The overreliance on God is also the reason that I put Berkeley on the list. While I think idealism definitely has its merits, Berkeley argues a reductio ad absurdum, ultimately requiring the existence of God for his argument to actually make sense.

Ah, but remember Berkeley was a bishop in the 18th Century Church of Ireland: Be greatful he wasn't like Bishop Ussher and claiming that the world began in October 4004BC or that the pope was "that man of sin" foretold in revelation (as long running CoI theology/pronouncements would have it).