See more Template talk:Philosophy sidebar articles on AOD.

Powered by
TTSReader
Share this page on
Article provided by Wikipedia


( => ( => ( => Template talk:Philosophy sidebar [pageid] => 23187135 ) =>
"WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Template-class)
""WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of "WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to "philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the "general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
 "Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's "quality scale.
 
 

Contents

Usage[edit]

This navbox is intended for very sparing use. Only the major branches of philosophy should include it. "Pontiff Greg Bard ("talk) 00:20, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Picture[edit]

Plato, Kant, Nietzsche. Is this representative, is there some rationale behind this? "80.248.250.130 (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, I came here to suggest replacing Neitzsche with someone who's equally influential to Analytic and Continental philosophy since those are the two modern currents, but I don't know nearly enough to suggest anyone better. "Tolstoyan at Heart ("talk) 16:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Justification of additions[edit]

I have added Indian, Chinese and Buddhist philosophy to the sidebar. It was clearly eurocentric, having various western philosophical movements (including scholasticism, a point anyone attempting to remove Buddhist philosophy because it is associated with a religion should note) but only the one token "eastern philosophy" link. These three definitely represent major currents of philosophical thought in Asia and indeed, is part of the philosophical tradition of mankind as a whole. (Javierfv1212 - Sabbe Satta Sukhi Hontu)

Request for comment about replacing Nietzsche with Hume[edit]

See the bottom of the demographic statistics of the PhilPapers surveys with the heading "Non-living philosophers most identified with". Since Hume came before Kant, the top three would be: Plato, Hume, Kant.

Even better yet, replace Plato with Aristotle. But Plato does have historical significance; arguably the Western philosophy proper starts with Plato, so I don't make the proposal here. "Ailenus ("talk) 14:14, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

An RFC usually comes only after preliminary discussion on a page. Ah, well, in any case, this gallery at the top of the sidebar just offers examples of diverse philosophers; we could go endlessly in circles trying to find the "best" 6. The current selection appears as reasonable as any other would. "Clean Copy"talk 05:42, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Agree, and making this change might trigger changes (or RFCs) on a monthly basis. - "DVdm ("talk) 06:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
"Immanuel Kant; "Martin Heidegger; "David Hume; "Arthur Schopenhauer; "G.W.F. Hegel; "Ludwig Wittgenstein; "Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel and/or "August Wilhelm Schlegel; "Friedrich Nietzsche; "Socrates; "John Stuart Mill; "Plato; "Aristotle; "Thomas Hobbes; and "René Descartes. --"Redrose64 🌹 ("talk) 21:20, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
@"Clean Copy: @"DVdm: I respectfully disagree that a list of six, or whatever number of in fact, representative philosophers which remains stable in the long term cannot be settled upon. I will not argue any further, however. Anyone is free to close the RfC, cease to comment, and let Nietzsche stay. I disagree with this course of action, but I resent unenlightened discussion more. "Ailenus ("talk) 05:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
) )