Comments on: Best Philosopher of the 20th Century http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/ Musings on Science, Religion and Philosophy Sun, 12 Feb 2012 01:57:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Daniel Ferrer http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3756 Daniel Ferrer Wed, 23 Jun 2010 13:17:33 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3756 I think who is being translated is a good sign of the importance of a philosopher -- since it takes lots of time and energy for a translator to translate philosophical writings. Lots of different languages shows the international impact. You would expect Heidegger to be studied in Germany and in German; but when he gets translated into Chinese, I think it shows that the publisher thinks there a market for that philosopher. Universal importance - not just a local or national person. In my earlier study, I noticed another issue in the Heidegger vs. Wittgenstein. Heidegger was cited in many areas outside of philosophy which is another indicator of universal impact. Wittgenstein wrote less (Dorfman, question: 5000 pages of notes) - therefore, also has less impact. Koli wrote amoung "certain circles" which includes international based on lots of translations into other languages and impact in other areas in than straight philosophy. Therefore - greatest philosopher? Greatest world wide impact? Answer: Heidegger. He was a member of the NS. He thought philosophy was only ontology. He was against metaphysics. He like poets. Etc etc. You may not like him. But we are not talking about who you like or dislike or if you like ice cream. How do we judge greatest for a philosopher? Look at their impact is one way. Writing Ph.D is one example too. What is your methodology for greatest? Data vs. reasons? Where are we at with the 5000 pages of notes by Wittgenstein? How much has that been translated into English? I think who is being translated is a good sign of the importance of a philosopher — since it takes lots of time and energy for a translator to translate philosophical writings. Lots of different languages shows the international impact. You would expect Heidegger to be studied in Germany and in German; but when he gets translated into Chinese, I think it shows that the publisher thinks there a market for that philosopher. Universal importance – not just a local or national person. In my earlier study, I noticed another issue in the Heidegger vs. Wittgenstein. Heidegger was cited in many areas outside of philosophy which is another indicator of universal impact. Wittgenstein wrote less (Dorfman, question: 5000 pages of notes) – therefore, also has less impact. Koli wrote amoung “certain circles” which includes international based on lots of translations into other languages and impact in other areas in than straight philosophy.
Therefore – greatest philosopher?
Greatest world wide impact?
Answer: Heidegger.
He was a member of the NS. He thought philosophy was only ontology.
He was against metaphysics. He like poets. Etc etc.
You may not like him. But we are not talking about who you like or dislike or if you like ice cream. How do we judge greatest for a philosopher? Look at their impact is one way. Writing Ph.D is one example too. What is your methodology for greatest?
Data vs. reasons?

Where are we at with the 5000 pages of notes by Wittgenstein?
How much has that been translated into English?

]]> By: Tushar Koli http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3755 Tushar Koli Wed, 23 Jun 2010 09:54:47 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3755 Just because Heidegger is most cited does not mean he is great. He may be just popular amongst a certain cirlces. Just because Heidegger is most cited does not mean he is great. He may be just popular amongst a certain cirlces.

]]> By: Michael Dorfman http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3750 Michael Dorfman Sun, 20 Jun 2010 09:03:53 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3750 Comparing the number of volumes translated into another language is not really a good measure of the importance of a philosopher, as much as how prolific he was. Wittgenstein was notoriously sparse in writing, and in addition to Heidegger's prodigious output, his lecture series across several decades were all transcribed. Comparing the number of volumes translated into another language is not really a good measure of the importance of a philosopher, as much as how prolific he was. Wittgenstein was notoriously sparse in writing, and in addition to Heidegger’s prodigious output, his lecture series across several decades were all transcribed.

]]> By: Daniel Ferrer http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3746 Daniel Ferrer Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:12:30 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3746 Yes, of course. Another example. If you look at how much Heidegger has been translated in Japanese vs. Wittgenstein: WorldCat results for: au: heidegger, and au: martin and la= "jpn" . (Save Search) Records found: 194 WorldCat results for: au: Wittgenstein, and au: Ludwig, and la= "jpn" . (Save Search) Records found: 49 You can see how much more is translated of Heidegger's writings. Or one of your examples: WorldCat results for: au: Aurobindo and la= "jpn" . (Save Search) Records found: 6 You can see there is no question of Heidegger as number one. Heidegger is the most written about philosopher of the 20th century and you can see most likly he has been translated more than any other philosopher as well. You can debate who you think is number one. But if you want to make a larger argument, then you need some reasons or data. In this case, the data is clearly Heidegger. Any more ideas about what would be good "data" for who is number one? On this topic I am not interested in your personal reasons. Keep me posted. Thanks, Daniel Ferrer. Yes, of course.
Another example. If you look at
how much Heidegger has been translated in
Japanese vs. Wittgenstein:
WorldCat results for: au: heidegger, and au: martin and la= “jpn” . (Save Search)
Records found: 194
WorldCat results for: au: Wittgenstein, and au: Ludwig, and la= “jpn” . (Save Search)
Records found: 49

You can see how much more is translated of Heidegger’s writings.
Or one of your examples:
WorldCat results for: au: Aurobindo and la= “jpn” . (Save Search)
Records found: 6

You can see there is no question of Heidegger as number one.

Heidegger is the most written about philosopher of the 20th century and you can see most likly he has been translated more than any other philosopher as well. You can debate who you think is number one. But if you want to make a larger argument, then you need some reasons or data. In this case, the data is clearly Heidegger.

Any more ideas about what would be good “data” for who is number one?
On this topic I am not interested in your personal reasons.
Keep me posted.

Thanks, Daniel Ferrer.

]]> By: Tushar Koli http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3745 Tushar Koli Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:29:44 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3745 What about the Indian greats like Aurobindo, Osho Rajaneesh, J Krishnamurti? Each one of them have produced volumes of philosophical literature. What about the Indian greats like Aurobindo, Osho Rajaneesh, J Krishnamurti? Each one of them have produced volumes of philosophical literature.

]]> By: Daniel Ferrer http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3495 Daniel Ferrer Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:56:13 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3495 You should have also noted that Hume was missing. The new database is ProQuest. "Doctoral dissertations and master's theses are a vital fund of scholarship for any discipline. The massive body of work available through ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) represents the most comprehensive source of academic research in the world." I used the title . You can use other kind of searches. But you can spend sometime looking at database. Current search for Quine for those years: 15 documents found for: TITLE(quine) AND PDN(>1/1/1997) AND PDN(1/1/1997) PDN(<12/31/2001). 3 documents found for: TITLE(carnap) AND PDN(>1/1/1997) AND PDN(<12/31/2001) Other issues: How many books are written about a philosopher? How many of his/hers book have been translated in other languages? (different languages etc). In artcles database how many times has that author been cited. That kind of data was used on my article that was mentioned in the above remarks. Humanity’s basic nature is as the interrogator. Questions -- please. Daniel Fidel Ferrer (ontological interrogator) Enjoy. You should have also noted that Hume was missing.

The new database is ProQuest.

“Doctoral dissertations and master’s theses are a vital fund of scholarship for any discipline. The massive body of work available through ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) represents the most comprehensive source of academic research in the world.”

I used the title .
You can use other kind of searches.
But you can spend sometime looking at database.

Current search for Quine for those years:
15 documents found for: TITLE(quine) AND PDN(>1/1/1997) AND PDN(1/1/1997) PDN(<12/31/2001).

3 documents found for: TITLE(carnap) AND PDN(>1/1/1997) AND PDN(<12/31/2001)

Other issues:
How many books are written about a philosopher?
How many of his/hers book have been translated in
other languages? (different languages etc).
In artcles database how many times has that
author been cited. That kind of data was used on my article
that was mentioned in the above remarks.

Humanity’s basic nature is as the interrogator.
Questions — please.

Daniel Fidel Ferrer
(ontological interrogator)
Enjoy.

]]> By: Clark http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3494 Clark Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:01:09 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3494 I suspect this will lead to a bias due to the very different ways Analytic Philosophy and Continental Philosophy work. Continental Philosophy tends to engage the great texts very much whereas Analytic Philosophy is much more engaged with the problems themselves and thus biases towards more recent work. As such it isn't a good indicator towards how those with an analytic tendency view the great names. It's odd you don't have Davidson, Quine, Fodor, Sellars or the like in your list at all. I suspect this will lead to a bias due to the very different ways Analytic Philosophy and Continental Philosophy work. Continental Philosophy tends to engage the great texts very much whereas Analytic Philosophy is much more engaged with the problems themselves and thus biases towards more recent work.

As such it isn’t a good indicator towards how those with an analytic tendency view the great names.

It’s odd you don’t have Davidson, Quine, Fodor, Sellars or the like in your list at all.

]]> By: Daniel Ferrer http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/2009/03/02/best-philosopher-of-the-20th-century/comment-page-1/#comment-3493 Daniel Ferrer Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:52:05 +0000 http://www.libertypages.com/cgw/?p=1781#comment-3493 Do the number of dissertations tell us anything about philosophy itself or just some kind of sociology of philosophy? These numbers are from year range of: 1997-2001 (as of October 2003). The number of citations changes as they load more information into the database, so this information is only good for October 2003, but it does show trends. Aristotle 67 citations Bergson 10 citations. Derrida 46 citations. Descartes 38 citations Dilthey 3 citations. Fichte 9 citations. Foucault 77 citations. Gadamer 25 citations. Hegel 93 citations. Heidegger 148 citations. Husserl 23 citations. Jaspers 5 citations Kant 158 citations. Kierkegaard 41 citations. Leibniz 28 citations. Levinas 55 citations. Marcuse 5 citations. Marx 38 citations Merleau-Ponty 26 citations Nietzsche 130 citations Plato 69 citations. Sartre 39 citations Scheler 3 citations Schelling 12 citations. Schleiermacher 17 citations. Schopenhauer 10 citations. Wittgenstein 81 citations. So the general rank of the recent dissertations (1997-2001) is Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Hegel, and then Wittgenstein. Do you find something wrong with this approach as if numbers mean anything in philosophy? What is taught in philosophy department is different than this…why is that? This shows the interest of research. But some departments are trying to do less Heidegger dissertations, since they are so many young philosophers on the market with Heidegger backgrounds. What is the market for young philosophers and where should they stand? Do the number of dissertations tell us anything about philosophy itself or just some kind of sociology of philosophy? These numbers are from year range of: 1997-2001 (as of October 2003). The number of citations changes as they load more information into the database, so this information is only good for October 2003, but it does show trends.

Aristotle 67 citations
Bergson 10 citations.
Derrida 46 citations.
Descartes 38 citations
Dilthey 3 citations.
Fichte 9 citations.
Foucault 77 citations.
Gadamer 25 citations.
Hegel 93 citations.
Heidegger 148 citations.
Husserl 23 citations.
Jaspers 5 citations
Kant 158 citations.
Kierkegaard 41 citations.
Leibniz 28 citations.
Levinas 55 citations.
Marcuse 5 citations.
Marx 38 citations
Merleau-Ponty 26 citations
Nietzsche 130 citations
Plato 69 citations.
Sartre 39 citations
Scheler 3 citations
Schelling 12 citations.
Schleiermacher 17 citations.
Schopenhauer 10 citations.
Wittgenstein 81 citations.

So the general rank of the recent dissertations (1997-2001) is Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger, Hegel, and then Wittgenstein. Do you find something wrong with this approach as if numbers mean anything in philosophy? What is taught in philosophy department is different than this…why is that? This shows the interest of research. But some departments are trying to do less Heidegger dissertations, since they are so many young philosophers on the market with Heidegger backgrounds. What is the market for young philosophers and where should they stand?

]]>