A Thinking Reed

Lovers of wisdom

Written by

Lee M.

in

The BBC is having a vote to determine the greatest (western) philosophers of all time. The voting is closed, – UPDATE: Thanks to Jack Perry I see now that the voting is not closed; it’s the nominations that are closed. My mistake. So, go vote if you want a say! – and the results will be announced in July.

I’m not entirely sure what the value of this kind of exercise is, but here’s the short list:

1. Aquinas
2. Aristotle
3. Descartes
4. Epicurus
5. Heidegger
6. Hobbes
7. Hume
8. Kant
9. Kierkegaard
10. Marx
11. Mill
12. Nietzsche
13. Plato
14. Karl Popper
15. Bertrand Russell
16. Sartre
17. Schopenhauer
18. Socrates
19. Spinoza
20. Wittgenstein

No really obvious omissions, though one could quibble. How about Locke, Berkeley, or Leibniz? And does anyone seriously think Karl Popper is the greatest philosopher who ever lived? Or Sartre?

And how are we measuring greatness anyway? Influence? Originality? Approximation to the truth? Surely only the latter is the truly philosophical way of measuring greatness.

Also, it’s somewhat misleading to list Plato and Socrates separately since virtually everything we know about Socrates’ philosophy comes from Plato.

Comments

13 responses to “Lovers of wisdom”

  1. Joshie

    I’m surprised that Socrates, Plato (good point about Plato and Socrates) and Kant are so low on the list!

    And shouldn’t Zeno (founder of the Stoic movement, highly influencial in “2nd Temple” Judaism and hence Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism) and Augustine of Hippo be on the list? If Aquinas can be considered a philosopher then why can’t Augustine?

    On the bright side this list did cause me to look up Karl Popper and L.J.J. Wittgenstein. I need to beef up on my Austro-British philosophers.

    Reply
  2. Lee

    Actually, that list is alphabetical and doesn’t represent any other ranking AFAIK.

    Good point about Augustine, who is certainly one of the most influential thinkers in the West.

    Reply
  3. Joshie

    Aha! that makes more sense now. duh.

    Reply
  4. Brandon

    I had exactly the same reaction to Karl Popper’s name being on the list.

    Reply
  5. Lee

    Someone else pointed out that Hegel is a fairly glaring omission. Especially given some of the others that made it.

    Reply
  6. jack perry

    I can see why Zeno should not be on the list, since I have not know the Stoic school to be so comprehensive as Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Aquinas, or Nietzsche (for example). The Stoics, by and large, affected how to live one’s life, rather than how to understand the world. But, as I understand it, if Epicurus is on there, then Zeno should be on there, too.

    Also Derrida, even though I don’t like the results of his philosophy.

    Yeah, you’d think Hegel should have been on there, since without Hegel’s dialectic there is no Marxism. Go figure.

    Reply
  7. jack perry

    By the way, why do you say that the voting is closed? I voted just now, and it appears to have accepted my vote.

    Reply
  8. Lee

    Ah! – My mistake. It’s the nominations that are closed.

    Thanks, Jack!

    Reply
  9. Joshie

    I suggest you look into the Stoa a little more Jack. It was a comprehensive system, as was Epicurianism.

    I do have a bone to pick with the BBC 4 people though. I took their philosophers quiz and scored a 5/12 (not surprising) but they had a quote from Plato that had Plato and Socrates as options for who said the quote which was highly confusing.

    Reply
  10. Lee

    Y’know the more I think about it, the more I think Locke was slighted. Not only is he a significant philosopher, but his political philosphy has probably had as great an influence as, say, Marx (and a more salutary one, I might add).

    Again, not that I would say Locke has any claim to being the greatest, but he has as good a claim to being in the top 20 as someone like Karl Popper!

    Reply
  11. Joshie

    Good point! On a somewhat related note, what about Rousseau?

    Reply
  12. jack perry

    I suppose my opinion of the Stoa may have been colored by what I’ve read about their effect, as opposed to any actual, comprehensive system they produced. Most of the histories of philosophy I’ve read tend to emphasize their ethics, and while a cosmology is mentioned (as with the Epicureans), it’s downplayed somewhat. I’m unaware of any epistemology of theirs.

    I agree about Locke & Rousseau. I’m not sure if Locke has had more of an effect than Marx (thinking of a number of unfortunate nations in the East), certainly a more salutary effect. But Locke definitely belongs on the list before Hobbes!

    Reply
  13. Lee

    I guess I would say that Rousseau lacks the philosophical depth or breadth of someone like Locke, but I haven’t actually read that much of R., so I could be mistaken.

    Reply

Leave a comment

More posts