My only problem with that, is that such a standard is not applied to any other profession. Meaning, people in this thread are not consistently reasoning this out. Nobody here would say there is no clear definition of a scientist, artist, plumber, carpenter, musician, etc. It doesn't make sense if everyone understands that all of those enumerated professions are distinguished by either work in the field, or the skill requisite to perform work in that field, and yet do not apply the same standard to philosophy. The reason I asked this question in the first place was because I had encountered this issue so many times, ad nauseum, that it simply had to be discussed because of how inconsistent people's views on the subject are — Garrett Travers
It's tragic how you are so clear in your writing, yet are so often misread. I'm glad I am not so misunderstood, it must be a burden for you. — bert1
"Often misread" willfully by some — 180 Proof
Dunno. Potential contingencies, in the aftermath of an intergrowth of two non-abelian intrinsically curved gauge fields, expressed as fibre bundles on the cotangent normalized perpendicularity, as in ophicalcite, myrmekite, or micropegmatite, relating to or being a bone between the hyomandibular and the quadrate in the mandibular suspensorium, should be implemented in mutual conservation of synchrone synergy, as an holistic collapse of the emblematic synthesis implicitly augmenting an asgardian symplectic symbolism, pervading confabulations the contemporary crisis in modern colloquial language. — Cornwell1
One key strategy is to try to not get too inebriated with your own verbosity. — universeness
We should be on guard and immanently attempt for less pretentiously loquacious talkatives; garruloussly avoiding gossipy and loose-lippened, indiscrete blabber, and aim for an objective silver tongue, so we can effectively and
efficiently adapt a communicative transparent mode of speech, instead of the chatty and loose-tongued vocalizations so blindly uttered by fellow subjects in present society, leading to incomensurable inconsistencies and incoherency. — Cornwell1
it's the poor syntax combined with unnecessary jargon. — Tom Storm
Let's say I want to get into music and I start playing guitar and learning how to sing. Naturally, there is going to be a learning curve between the time when I start learning those skill and the time when I can not only compose coherent music, but perform it in its complete form. I would say you are a musician when you have reached the latter point. — Garrett Travers
Perhaps after the beers are flowing well, I will ask the company.
So guys 'What constitutes a Philosopher.' They may respond or they may throw their drinks at me. I will find out soon.
Cheers Fur Noo! — universeness
In my view, you become a musician as soon as you hit that first note on your guitar. I'm invested in rock music. I recently listened to two interviews with successful musicians Tom Morello and Dave Grohl. Both recalled the days they first played their instruments as the days their journeys as musicians started. Even more so, Dave Grohl started drumming even before he got his first drum kit. He had an unusual habit of drumming using only his teeth. When I'm thinking of young Dave playing songs using his teeth on his way to school, I'm seeing a musician in him. — pfirefry
Someone becomes a musician/philosopher as soon as they start identifying themself as a musician/philosopher. — pfirefry
If someone identifies as a musician/philosopher, I think it is wrong for others to claim otherwise. It is still fine to omit this detail when it has low relevance. If someone claims to be a musician but they never play music, there is no value in referring to them as a musician. But we also should refrain from claiming that they aren't a musician. — pfirefry
"What makes a philosopher great?" — pfirefry
I have agreed with your definitions of 'philosopher' in general terms, but I do think the job title philosopher is 'more nuanced' than job titles such as physicist. I do think 'nuanced' is also true of job titles such as artist, musician, politician, cook etc. I personally don't consider Tracey Emin or Damien Hirst etc artists. Unless you put the word 'con' in front of the term. Yet that's the title they currently hold. Of all the people in the world who state the title politician in their job description, I think there are few who should actually be assigned as such. This is just my opinion of course but some job titles are more open to the subjective opinion of people compared to others — universeness
the standard that I assert that defines them is the skill and knowledge requisite to perform within that given domain independent of an instructor. We agree there? — Garrett Travers
Nietzsche says that the "real philosophers are commanders and law-givers." (Beyond Good and Evil, "We Scholars") — Fooloso4
OK, let's start from something simple and obvious: A philosopher is someone who practices philosophy. The word "philosopher" comes from the ancient Greek "philos" (= friend, lover) and "sophia" (= wisdom). This is very simple, but of course, not everyone who loves wisdom can be called a philosopher! The key word is "practicing", i.e. he must be involved systematically in philosophy, as a field of knowledge, and esp. as a profession. I guess it is the same with a scientist, who is involved systematically in science, as a field of knowledge, and esp. as a profession.Just what is it that constitutes a philosopher? — Garrett Travers
OK, let's start from something simple and obvious: A philosopher is someone who practices philosophy. The word "philosopher" comes from the ancient Greek "philos" (= friend, lover) and "sophia" (= wisdom). This is very simple, but of course, not everyone who loves wisdom can be called a philosopher! The key word is "practicing", i.e. he must be involved systematically in philosophy, as a field of knowledge, and esp. as a profession. I guess it is the same with a scientist, who is involved systematically in science, as a field of knowledge, and esp. as a profession. — Alkis Piskas
Do you mean "ethics" as a branch of philosophy or as a specialization , e.g. "ethics officer", post in "department of ethics", etc.?what does such a definition tell us in regards to ethics? — Garrett Travers
as a profession. — Alkis Piskas
Is a sophist a philosopher — Fooloso4
I can't see anything else than a philosopher specialized in ethics. As a biologist is a scientist specialized in biology. There's no difference regasrding where one is specialized in.Ethics as a branch of philosophy, informed by your definition of a philosopher. What does that tell us of ethics, you think? — Garrett Travers
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.