It ought to be an armchair me thinks. A nice one though.

A picture of Hegel to scare people off.

Well, as you might suspect, Moliere, I'm one of those old-fashioned colour-blind leftists. I don't really go for affirmative action and have a great antipathy to labelling people primarily as de-individualized representatives of an ethnic community. To the extent that I might favour affirmative action socially it certainly wouldn't be in the context of an independent club of amateur philosophers (amateur = for the love). I think it's patronizing and silly. What's the problem: black people hate Kant?

European philosophy is European only in place of origin, not in who's meant to appreciate it, use it and develop it. Like French cheese.

I respect your position and would like to answer more expansively, but, you know, my poor broken arm.

EDIT: But I do agree more attention needs to be paid to philosophers ignored by the tradition, especially if they have been marginalized merely for their ethnicity. (I'm not contradicting myself here, I don't think)

But maybe you should add a poll to this discussion, with a choice of philosophers or other things to use as the favicon.

Real talk, I think it should be a symbol instead of a single Philosopher.

I would love to give the face of this forum to somebody who represents an oppressed minority [however much Hanover may protest ;)] like bell hooks? — Moliere

My suggestion:

http://theothermystery.blogspot.com/2012/06/mystic-of-religius-symbol.html

like bell hooks

As I also brought up this issue, I'd like to throw in my two cents here for bell hooks: oh god no.

Maybe along these lines. I'd go for something simple and modern anyway. No Greeks.

Looks like buddy's brain is buffering.

I'd argue that such icons are even more revealing of philosophical prejudices than pictures of Socrates or Kant, because they assume a mental internalism and an excessively Cartesian philosophy of mind. Some of us don't see thinking as just "in the head".

Clearly there will never be agreement here. :D

I do like Rodin's Thinker partly because it shows the whole person, body and all, in a posture of contemplation. But it's become the cliché of clichés.

I fear this poor chap had a bad result from an MRI.

He should probably get those dots removed. (me speaking from experience)

Meow!

GREG

I sort of prefer a happier face, as this is supposed to be fun...











...just a few suggestions.

Meow!

GREG

This should attract a certain type of posters.

EDIT: what am I doing wrong with that picture?

EDIT: what am I doing wrong with that picture? — Benkei

That URL goes to a web page, not an image. Is the image you want on that page? Which one?



Okay I get it. You have to strip out the query string for those images, i.e., everything after the file extension.

I guess while we're going that route...

Serves me right for trying. Philistines...

I guess while we're going that route... — discoii

Ahhh...

Somthin fer da Dads!!!



... ain't it the truth! :D

Meow!

GREG

I agree with AbsurdRhetor that it should be a universal symbol instead of a non-related object or single philosopher.

Confucius

That's a pretty cool idea, methinks. Like Hypatia, for instance.

Also, poll added.

Anyway, when we do decide on something, I'll be happy to Photoshop it a bit before sticking it up (at least partly because we don't want to get sued for copyright infringement).

Quite like the idea of Hypatia. Anyone object to using her as our favicon?

:D

I second this.

Nietzsche or my nudes? — Πετροκότσυφας

Yes.

What about this one of Hypatia?


Here it is at favicon size:


I could maybe up the contrast a little.

This is the Fayum mummy portrait from Roman Egypt, now at the British Museum.

I think it should be a symbol instead of a single Philosopher. — AbsurdRhetor

I agree. Although the Kant icon doesn't bother me much.