Would we be better off with philosophers as our elected representatives rather than politicians.

Certainly NOT British or American Philosophers! The idea of reducing our reliance on the giddy vagaries of the herd is welcome. Less democracy, more autocracy.

Okay wise one...tell me your understanding of the word?

Read 'The Two Philosophers' in Acid House by Irvine Welsh.

No.

It's written in 'jock'; expand your horizons fount-creature.

Simon "THE FOUNT"Boyd says:
The fount does not believe in labels...

Thank you, Simon, you brighten my day.

The Fount is pleased to bring beams of light into Luddy's day...

Gille, are you saying the only people allowed to call themselves philosophers are those who make a living out of it? Do you define everyone by how they make money?

You suggest (that's the derivation of the word - not its current meaning) that you know what the current meaning is. Care to enlighten the rest of us?

Some stamps are worth a fortune these days.

Hi Fatman. I do not remember the name of the philosopher, perhaps someone else has seen the reference but I kept the cutting for a while from his interview in the newspaper in which he said that if a decision had to be taken it should benefit the maximum amount of people. He was talking about morality so I presume genocide was not on his mind.

Posted on 15 Jul 2012 19:35:31 BDT
Simon "THE FOUNT" Boyd says:
Gurdjieff, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, Osho, Krishnamurti....Yes...

Keith Harris and Orville, Nooky Bear, Hector.

Hi Simon. I'm not sure I would put my future in the hands of Rick Wakeman and Jon Anderson and friends. I mean they made some fairly good music for the time but Tales from Topographic Oceans was a bit of a dud. Once again you have me somewhat baffled.

Hi Chaz....relax....take deep breaths....join Alice.

Yes, I am saying that. It's like poets, musicians and footballers (only more so): it only counts if you're making a living at it. Otherwise you're merely someone who writes poetry, plays music, etc, possibly very badly. I'm sure you've met self-proclaimed examples of the above whom you didn't feel deserved the title?

That's not to say that if you did it for a living you would necessarily be any good, but it would at least be an indication that there were other people who took your abilities seriously.

(Nothing personal btw. I've done some philosophy (and dabbled in the other things too!), but I'd never refer to myself as 'a philosopher'.)

As for the meaning: if you're a philosopher you ought to know! It's hard to define but I don't mind having a go: philosophy is the attempt to discover, through the use of reason, the parameters of human life.

Boydy, you will be happy to know that, as someone who does his best to avoid concepts, logic and structured reasoning altogether - everything you refer to as 'labels' - you are the polar opposite of what I would consider a philosopher.

Gille.....thank you....you make me feel joyful.

Anything to oblige. ;)

So Einstein wasn't a physicist until after he had published his theories of relativity and Darwin was never a biologist, as none of his money came from his publications? Van Gogh was always being bailed out by his brother, John Donne didn't sell a single poem until 300 years after he died, and the list of classic authors never published in their lifetimes goes on and on... are you trying to tell me the because Emily Bronte died before she received any money from the publication of Wuthering Heights, she was not a novelist?

I have had philosophy articles published, and for money, and I 'lived' on it (for about a week)... does that count? Or was I briefly a philosopher and have to wait for the next cheque before I'm a philosopher again? I've even got the bit of paper that says other people thought I could do it at one time...

I know we're label-averse here, but it's not the only one I use for myself, as I don't believe what people do for a living defines them. I was a postman once, although I never thought of myself as a postman. Other people might have, though, because it fitted their concepts. Doesn't mean either of us would have been right. :)

R Pharo posts gibberish...hurrah!.....intelligence grows in a new soil...there's a new freckle on the nose of the giant pixie....Congrats!

[Deleted by the author on 16 Jul 2012 22:27:36 BDT]

The head of the history department showed me how to defluff my mouse when I was using it as an excuse as to why my essay was going to be late. I was well impressed. Didn't even know it had a little ball in it.

Spin says:
Chalieost: No offence, but tell us something we don't know...Your recent readings of Greek history does not qualify you for a degree in ancient greek philosophy. Impress me: What is your take on "Thaetetus"?

Hi Spin. Since I do not feel the need to impress you the answer is a simple, no.

Luddite Joe says:
Simon "THE FOUNT"Boyd says:
The fount does not believe in labels...

Thank you, Simon, you brighten my day.

Charlieost says: Wonderfully spotted Joe. And very funny. Ah the irony.

Hi gille. Cheryl Cole and Justin Beiber make a living from being recording artists but that does not in my mind qualify them as talented even though they make huge amounts of money. Diogenes is acclaimed as a philosopher even though he posessed nothing but a dirty cloak. Hardly a living.

Hi R. Pharo. You have obviously annoyed the so called fount. That counts as a philosopher as in my reckoning the fount is an ignoramus. Five thousand years ago he would possibly have demanded that you take poison.

[Deleted by the author on 19 Aug 2012 07:57:49 BDT]