Who is more philosophically significant in the modern world? — Bret Bernhoft

Niether, really. As a comedian, Bill was and is one of my favorites.

I wouldn't say Rogan is "celebrated," he's just a fairly open guy who talks to anyone (but mostly other comedians), came at a time when podcasting wasn't huge yet, and had some guests do and say some crazy stuff on his show (like Elon Musk). So he's popular, and because he occasionally has ultra conservative guests and says some things about trans people -- and likes cars and is a big guy with tattoos who can kick ass, etc., he appeals to teens and many on the Right. I wouldn't call him philosophically relevant.

Bill Hicks and Joe Rogan both spoke (at one point or another) about the importance of manifesting one's mind through the use of pragmatism, tools and self-reflection. — Bret Bernhoft

I'm not sure what you mean by any of this.

I wouldn't say Rogan is "celebrated," he's just a fairly open guy who talks to anyone — Xtrix

:up:

Bill Hicks and Joe Rogan both spoke (at one point or another) about the importance of manifesting one's mind through the use of pragmatism, tools and self-reflection. — Bret Bernhoft

Hicks is often great. Rogan is...OK, I guess. But even Hicks does not appeal to me much as a philosopher. I do love comedians for their honesty. The good ones tell us nasty truth about ourselves, someone allowing us to confess and forgive together (not saying this is all they do, of course.)

I have never liked stand up comedy, but at least Hicks seemed intermittently insightful. Rogan seems to me to be a bit of a try-hard plonker, and these days a weed-addled bore.

I'd prefer to imagine who would win in a philosophical sparring match.

A great absurdist OP

I'm afraid Joe would win, even though Hicks would win in funny points, eloquence, and unique style.
Joe accepts the world as it is and works with it, motivating others where he can.

Hicks is perpetually dissatisfied and escapist, and brings to light the corruption and absurdity of modern life, but doesn't offer much beyond choosing love over fear and marking reality off as being "just a ride". Someone I imagine who didn't follow his own philosophically so well, similar to Alan Watts.

Who is more philosophically significant in the modern world? — Bret Bernhoft

It's a question of practical application and the judgement of history. Rogan's theory of justice has been hugely influential in jurisprudence, whilst Hicks mainly concerned himself with a foundational theory of mathematics that was ultimately debunked. Hicks was extremely popular with students and a very entertaining lecturer. Hhis 'clubbable' nature sustained a reputation that his philosophy did not truly merit. He was certainly a kind man and would often give up his weekends to look after wounded kittens. Rogan, on the other hand, was notoriously irascible and provocative, sometime leaving his students in tears and alienating his colleagues. His philosophical insights, however, were original without being merely idiosyncratic, casting new light on old problems and opening up fresh lines of enquiry for a generation of thinkers.

Yes.

Rogan, on the other hand, was notoriously irascible and provocative, sometime leaving his students in tears and alienating his colleagues. His philosophical insights, however, were original without being merely idiosyncratic, casting new light on old problems and opening up fresh lines of enquiry for a generation of thinkers. — Cuthbert

Is it true that Rogan once wrote a definitive book on psychophysical parallelism, but tore it up one weekend making filters for his continental jazz cigarettes?

It was just a rumour. I use my college alumni magazines to make filters. I've reached 2017, working through an article about the coat of arms.

Who is more philosophically significant in the modern world? — Bret Bernhoft

Hicks did have a position, a general sort of spiritual/philosophical position.
Joe Rogen has a lot of opinions, probably a few philosophical bases, like many modern people. But I don't think he's celebrated as a philosopher. He's celebrated by people with similar opinions. And he's celebrated by people who like his interviews. And his interview are very, very good. It seems a kind of like comparing lynxes and coyotes. Which one should be celebrated more? And complicated by the fact that the lync is dead.

Is it true that Rogan once wrote a definitive book on psychophysical parallelism, but tore it up one weekend making filters for his continental jazz cigarettes? — Tom Storm

:up:

Going by the polls, I've subscribed to the wrong channel! :snicker:

So meeeee!

Bill Hicks doesn't really have a central "channel" to find his best content. But if you search for his stand-up on YouTube, you'll find most of it.

Arigato gozaimus!

A serious and good philosophical work could be written consisting entirely of jokes. — Ludwig Wittgenstein

No wonder Democritus was known as the laughing philosopher. Poor Heraclitus, the weeping philosopher; he didn't get the joke(s), did he now?

:snicker:

[...]Without laughter there would be no Tao. — Laozi