Ah yes, I must be like those pesky feminists, who, in fighting for the equality of women, must hate all men. The logic is undeniable, thanks Dave. #notallphilosophy

I mean honestly, if you've any ear at all for for the history of philosophy you'd know that the idea of the Great Chain of Being is just about the most 'unnatural' idea there is: it is literally a divinely ordained order which, like Wayfarer's dictum, posits the 'order of nature' as beyond - outside of - 'the nature of order'. If you think this jibes well with your naturalism, then either you're a terrible naturalist or a worse reader of philosophy.

So more like a philosophical appropriation or expression of politics, rather than a political appropriation of philosophy. — jamalrob

I don't know if 'appropriation' is the right word - all philosophies lend themselves to certain political emphases over others, and appropriation suggests a kind of exteriorly of politics from philosophy, which I think can't be maintained.

If you think all of your examples cannot be met with counter-examples, then you are hopelessly naive. — Thorongil

Oh please, you may as well start your own hashtag: #notallphilosophy. If you think the systemic tendencies of philosophical history are simply refuted by a few counter-examples, then your accusation of naivety is itself hopelessly misplaced. And like I said, I'm not just talking about idealism in the sense of 'it's all in my head', but any kind of philosophy which would seek to idealize some aspect of reality over others as being the Really True Thing That Does All Of The Stuff Unilaterally, including atoms, spirit, Prime Movers, or, when it comes to the human, DNA and brain.

For instance, you seem to be appealing to nature and yet railing against hierarchical organisation. — apokrisis

Funny, I don't believe I've used the word hierarchy once in this conversation, but feel free to conjure up disagreements as you are consistently wont to do.