I aspire to be one but unfortunately these academics don't accept amateurs among their ranks.
2006-09-15 13:12:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by Rustic 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Peter Singer is a big cheese in the world of Ethics. He's the guy who literally wrote the book on animal liberation. Very strong critic of the Bush administration, as well.
Jacques Derrida was one of the biggest names around for years, but he died recently. Many philosophers in the English speaking world have only qualified respect for him, on the grounds that his writing is needlessly obscure. Derrida had an answer for them but I don't personally find it very convincing. Huge influence on literary criticism in particular; not necessarily for the best.
John Rawls is another guy who's big in Ethics, on the strength of 'A Theory of Justice'. Again, I think he died a little while ago.
Of the stature of Wittgenstein, though...tricky. Not sure if Foucault counts as a philosopher exactly, but I'd rate him up there with L.W. Unlike many French philosophers he did at least attempt to make coherent arguments now and again.
For sheer massive influence on multiple disciplines, Chomsky is probably the man, if anything even more so in linguistics than in politics. But he wouldn't call himself a philosopher, I don't think.
2006-09-16 07:19:57
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
if you're aiming at epistemology then i would say critical realism would be one of the currently 'established' school of thought :roy bhaskar and andrew sayer are among the most influential thinkers of the group. I am not keen on postmodern hype incl. lyotard but richard rorty's and gayatri spivak's works are interesting to read. In my opinion the most influential thinker of the last 15 years would be the recently desceased Jurgen Habermas.And don't forget nowaday most popular thinker: Noam Chomsky
2006-09-15 23:45:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by jingleh4m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/index.htm
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/bublitz.htm
This work by Bublitz is good, but I have never heard Ute Bublitz in main stream media, so it depends on what you mean by "respected".
Ute Bublitz (1998)
Beyond Philosophy
Reconciliation and Rejection
Three Essays on Aristotle and Hegel
Preface
"This book is about philosophy, without, however, being a philosophy book. I did not even wish to continue the line of traditional philosophy. Indeed, I am convinced that it is impossible for anyone to do so today.
The meaning of philosophy is deeply linked to reconciliation. And reconciliation to the world as it is today is no longer possible. Living unreconciled opens the way for rejection. Yet, rejection can never carry out what it implicitly requests: a thorough transformation of life. Without the element of the general, rejection is doomed to certain failure. Only philosophy has been able to develop that generality. On the other hand, mere philosophical knowledge of how to grasp the whole, dies the moment it is faced with a world to which reconciliation is impossible. Today, then, we can neither reject the way we live, nor reconcile ourselves to it. In this book, I confront the two so that they mutually illuminate each other with the hope that, in their combined light we can see our path into the future. ..."
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/bublitz.htm
How about Noam Chomsky?
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/chomsky.htm
2006-09-15 13:38:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Psyengine 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nelson Mandela
2006-09-17 01:39:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wittgenstein.
2006-09-15 13:16:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Barks-at-Parrots 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are a lot of modern ethicists such as Peter Singer who get a lot of attention. John Searle of the mind and cognitivist studies over at Stanford also comes to mind.
2006-09-15 13:16:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by mpaone12 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know about current, but Bertrand Russell and Sartre had significant ideas that were worthy of further thought
2006-09-17 09:28:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by nlj1520 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
How a bout Stanley Clavell
2006-09-15 16:44:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by JEFFREY K 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would have to be Chomsky, Derrida, and Quine.
2006-09-16 16:07:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋