Thomas Friedman (Our fourth greatest contemporary philosopher)
― C0L1N B..., Monday, 21 April 2008 03:52 (sixteen years ago) link
significance as a public intellectual does not necessarily vary directly with significance as an intellectual. the list was merely intended to illustrate what (some) people mean by the term, and as an alternative to the people listed in the horowitz book, which does not list public intellectuals.
― gabbneb, Monday, 21 April 2008 04:05 (sixteen years ago) link
Okay, Friedman fits within the list's qualifications. But I think when people bemoan the lack of public intellectuals in the U.S., they're complaining that aren't many academics or, uh, thinkers addressing a broadly similar constituency or contributing to the same discourse. Of course there are academics in various fields who have attracted a larger audience, but that list just sort of reinforces the feeling that a lot of these people aren't really talking to each other. Do Friedman and Jurgen Habermas share a public? Are they similarly qualified as 'intellectuals'?
― C0L1N B..., Monday, 21 April 2008 04:37 (sixteen years ago) link
share a public... sphere? lololololol
― max, Monday, 21 April 2008 04:46 (sixteen years ago) link
AC Grayling. He gets tarred with the popularist brush but he ain't no Alain de Boton. In a way he is going for the same mass-appeal, trying to bring philosophy to a wider audience, but he's a better thinker and writer and deals with more serious topics.
― ledge, Monday, 21 April 2008 09:06 (sixteen years ago) link
He's rubbish
― Tom D., Monday, 21 April 2008 09:07 (sixteen years ago) link
i'm kind of impressed habermas is still alive.
― banriquit, Monday, 21 April 2008 09:07 (sixteen years ago) link
ah cmon gimme more than that.
― ledge, Monday, 21 April 2008 09:50 (sixteen years ago) link
Mediocre philospher for hire
― Tom D., Monday, 21 April 2008 09:55 (sixteen years ago) link
Mediocre -> pitching things at a level the public can understand. For hire -> getting philosophy out there in the public sphere. Win-win.
― ledge, Monday, 21 April 2008 09:56 (sixteen years ago) link
grayling, john gray... roger scruton, probably some other dudes are UK category public intellectuals, like em or not.
― banriquit, Monday, 21 April 2008 09:58 (sixteen years ago) link
Mediocre -> pitching things at a level the public can understand.
Nah. I meant more in the traditional sense of "not very good really"
― Tom D., Monday, 21 April 2008 10:10 (sixteen years ago) link
stupendous hair.
― Frogman Henry, Monday, 21 April 2008 10:20 (sixteen years ago) link
Well I haven't read his more academic stuff so can't comment on that, but for all his Guardian columns, and every time I've heard him on the radio or seen him on Newsnight he's been utterly OTMFM. He might not come across as the deepest of thinkers but for the kind of practical ethics subjects that he comments on I don't think deep thought is required; just a kind of a clarity and commitment, and lack of agenda, that you normally just don't get from pundits.
― ledge, Monday, 21 April 2008 10:23 (sixteen years ago) link
Indeed, my problem is that I hang out with bitchy philosophers
― Tom D., Monday, 21 April 2008 10:25 (sixteen years ago) link
i doubt he's any worse than the run of public intellectuals in this country over the last century or so -- he's a good example beucause he isn't a massive game-changing wittgenstein/chomsky/foucault-type.
― banriquit, Monday, 21 April 2008 10:25 (sixteen years ago) link
Freddie Ayer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AC Grayling
― Tom D., Monday, 21 April 2008 10:26 (sixteen years ago) link
Never read Ayer, but Grayling is engaging and fun and not too lite-- a perfect public intellectual!
I quite enjoyed Steve Fullers "Kuhn vs Popper The Struggle for the Soul of Science" yes a very dramatic title, to my mind he covers way too much ground and his theological asides are annoying but any defence of Popper is ok with me. 8/10 !
re comments on the position of Chomsky/Dennet/Fodor and other "mentals" my only comment would be reacting to Skinners excesses is well and good but idioms and rules dont have to be "internal", ie at some point "beliefs" are not grounded "on" knowledge, they are grounded "in" action-hence beliefs dont cause , or prefigure our actions.
― Kiwi, Monday, 21 April 2008 11:20 (sixteen years ago) link
being a public intellectual in contemporary America is the loneliest number that you'll ever do.
― Dr Morbius, Monday, 21 April 2008 13:51 (sixteen years ago) link
Since Fish has been mentioned this seems timely - O HAI I UPGRADED YR POMO:
http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/french-theory-in-america-part-two/
― rogermexico., Monday, 21 April 2008 22:40 (sixteen years ago) link
http://www.anythingleft-handed.co.uk/nl/nlimages/eggheads.jpg
oh right
― DG, Monday, 21 April 2008 22:42 (sixteen years ago) link