The only mitigating circumstance I can think is that was a reaction to the communist terror. — Andrew4Handel
She came across as a psychopath with a very chilling view of politics and economics. — Andrew4Handel
she wasn't a bad stylist. She could actually write decent sounding sentences — Baden
It is easy to win the battle of survival of the fittest and just go round and kill your competition. The reason we don't all just fight to the death is because cooperation is better for ourselves. — Andrew4Handel
competition — Bitter Crank
Competition stifles innovation. Collaboration strengthens contemplation. — Lif3r
Right. Well, so can I. So why am I not more famous? — Bitter Crank
She wasn't "officially" a philosopher no, but she had a decent enough educational attainment (in the context of her milieu) to be not entirely discountable as a thinker. IOW, she was notably bright and did well at school and university, so people who try to make out that she was thick and utterly discountable are protesting too much. — gurugeorge
It's true that her understanding of philosophy and the history of philosophy isn't what's standard these days, but again, that's down to the context of her education — gurugeorge
One might say, in a trope, that her understanding of philosophy is frozen in amber, from a past time and another culture, and that's why it looks a bit strange to people who have been weaned on either the post-Frege/Russell analytic tradition or the post-Lukacs continental tradition. — gurugeorge
For example, criticisms of her ethics on the basis of the standard analytic is/ought distinction (such as Nozick's), completely miss the point that she really does take seriously the Aristotelian view that things have specific natures, which bypasses the Humean problematic entirely. — gurugeorge
In sum, once one understands her context and limitations better, one tends to cut her some slack, and within those limitations, she's actually quite an interesting philosopher. But of course many people will be unwilling to cut her that slack, for the obvious reason that she was vehemently anti-Communist and pro-Capitalist. — gurugeorge
But then, for the rest of us, why bother with her over the thousands of similar people for to whom we might extend the same courtesy? — John Doe
though it's notable and interesting that you want to move in the direction of how Sellars views philosophy, so obviously the big-picture vision is not entirely dead in analytic departments — John Doe
Ultimately, her thought is not of high enough value to justify the personal expenditure for most individuals — John Doe
Well that's why I referenced him - like, come on guys, get off your arses, it's not totally alien to your own tradition. So what if you get it wrong and other philosophers laugh and point? Try. — gurugeorge
Another reason she's interesting is because very few philosophers in recent times have tried their hand at a complete, systematic "big picture" philosophy with many levels, from synoptic overview to ethical, even aesthetic advice for everyday life. One might say that's because it's been demonstrated to be a fruitless or hubristic endeavour, but really it hasn't; the twee tone of faux humility that's characterized much of academic philosophy in the 20th century, especially in the analytic tradition, has really just been more of a fashion statement and "house style." — gurugeorge
the majority of educated people — John Doe
But this is just an obviously false idea, especially once alternate logics started getting real development (starting with Intuintionistic Logic Heyting made based on Brouwer's intuitionism about math). Different logics make different metaphysical assumptions; intuitionistic logic is anti-realist (it was juxtaposed against math platonism for a reason). — MindForged
This is probably the source of stigma of philosophy not making progress. It continuously drills down, making issues clearer while creating ever more positions people can hold on every issue. — MindForged
Generally a good guide, but not always. — gurugeorge
(Also, I'd be careful about that sort of appeal to authority - libertarians have the highest IQ of all the political persuasions ;) ) — gurugeorge
I'd be careful defending any political position that fails to adequately account for the views expressed by a large community of intelligent and hard working individuals from across the political spectrum. — John Doe
Well if you put it that way, then Rand isn't "ignored," but a modestly popular taste on the Right. (Lots of books sold, remember?) — gurugeorge
And if you want to use "intelligence," as a criterion, what better measure of general intelligence do we have than IQ tests? — gurugeorge
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.