Who's your favorite philosopher?

Myself
I'm always correct when left to myself...

essentially yes, Ayn Rand can, at best, be seen as an advocate for the free market and for the creativity of the autonomous individual forgetting all the nuances and complications that ensue from such a simplistic gestalt.

This seems to have morphed into "The Ayn Rand Thread.' Hmmm...

I offer my apology for my part in that morph.

truth
Thanks guys. I hate to answer unsophisticated attacks. I don't know how I let myself fall into the trap of the not ready for prime timers. My answers to their inanities make me look either like a rude or a condesending person. So, I'm not responding further--except to people of Dys' and Andrew's calibre. Now I really sound like an elitist. So be it.

I've actually heard (from newer sources and books that aren't on the web, and again, that I no longer have) that there have been other such studies that show similar things. That, and that there was considerably more scavenging going on that actual hunting. But again, you don't have to take my word for it. Along with the Bushmen, people typically mention the Ju. I haven't read the actual study, so I can't tell you where to find it, but it's something that every professor of anthropology alludes to at some point. If some hunter gatherer groups can save massive amounts of time as well, I don't see why others wouldn't be able to.

Bill, I heard from someone that Atlas Shrugged was patterned after the NT (plot-wise), but I've never read the NT, so I don't know for sure. Rand was an atheist, so essentially she was putting forth her own idea as more or less equivalent to Christianity - only it focused on a heaven on earth rather than a mystical theoretical one.

Dyslexia,
I attribute much of the success I've enjoyed in business to the philosophies of Ayn Rand. I do not consider myself autonomous, despite the fact I aspire to emulate her ideals. While I can certainly appreciate the belief that her philosophy is simplistic and no doubt a different brand than say, Aristotle or Socrates, I consider it philosophy just the same. She presented new ideas and articulated them well enough to be understood by the masses. Rather than holding this simplistic approach against her, I respect her more for it. One should also keep in mind that English was her second language. She is my favorite philosopher simply because her philosophies have had the greatest impact on my life. You would no doubt be surprised by the quantity and quality of the philosophic authors whose works reside on my shelves. The pride of my collection is the "Library of the World's Best Literature", a 30 volume set published in 1896. I am somewhat surprised that I should have to qualify myself, before my opinion can be considered to have merit. Surely you realize that many of the names you do respect had little or no knowledge of the works of others.
JL Nobody,
I merely responded to your "attack" on jaco213's post. My "inane" responses to your questions each contained credible sources. Your statement: "My answers to their inanities make me look either like a rude or a condescending person." is not quite accurate. That very sentence makes you look like both. I simply answered your questions as best I could and followed up with my own.
Perhaps there were shades of passive aggression in my questions, and if so, I am sorry. Considering you don't find me worthy of a response, I don't know why I'm addressing you now. You really do sound like an elitist… So be it.
Rufio,
I have read the NT and can indeed see the similarity. I would be curious to learn if that was pointed out by someone who loved or hated Atlas Shrugged (there seems to be no middle ground). I don't think she considered her philosophy (if it can be called that, LOL) a replacement for Christianity. She frequently lumped all religions and all forms of government into a single term; society. From an individual's standpoint, she defined society as everyone but me. This is another philosophy (again, if it can be called that), that I happen to agree with.

He loved it, actually... he was the one who told me I should read it. He was also the one who suggested that it was because she wanted Objectivism considered as an ideal on par with Christianity, if not quite a "replacement" for it.

My favorite philosopher is Buddha.

Rufio, thank you for answering my question. I have found that many people of a similar mind set as your friend have been somewhat obsessive about her philosophies, just as some people are a little obsessive about the Bible. In both cases, at least in my experience, said people are better off than if they didn't have something to cling to. Any philosophy that shames violence, in my opinion, is a pretty good thing to be obsessive about. Of course, I think everyone should ground themselves in realism first, but not everyone has that prerogative. At any rate; your friend, at least in my opinion, is further evidence that Ayn Rand is a true philosopher. It troubles me that those that find her philosophies invalid feel such a need to discredit her altogether.

I don't feel any need to discredit Rand. Ignoring her is best. She was a second-rate novelist, and what passes for philosophy on her part remains popular in the "amen corner" of the right-wing free market crowd. That there never has been a free market anywhere, anywhen, seems not to matter.

There seems to be a fair bit of 'truth' at the extreme ends of the spectrum - Libertarian/Socialist.

The problem is neither apply to actual reality; like communism, a great idea in theory, that in practice colapses under the onslaught of the negative ravages of 'human' nature.

Philosophy, in my thinking is like design; one must take care of the 'practicalities' before one can successfully describe 'the way it should be'!

This Rand topic somehow seems to keep coming back. There was a big argument we had a while back that was entitled something with "Objectivism" if you want to read it. In short: Rand does not really provide any arguments or challenge premises. She wrote novels with her vision of the world, where she has brilliant characters who are extremely self-centered knock down straw men. The Fountainhead would be an entirely different book if there was a character in it who was as original an architect as Roark but actually had some emotion or compassion. The novel form is very deceptive because the "arguments" are hidden in plot and character development, though the latter is entirely lacking in Rand. Regarding the surveys: Rand has received a great deal of popularity, but I have never met a Rand fan who was well versed in philosophy in particular and well read in general. There is not meant to be a judgment, but the overwhelming tendency gives an indication about the actual philosophical worth of her novels. They tend to be popular among people who think that reading a single book entitles them to the belief that they are suddenly enlightened, which, to be fair, is admittedly consistent with the level of arrogance put forward by her writing. It's interesting to compare the list of readers' choices with what the board committee believed where the most important works of the twentieth century.

Getting back to the original topic: If I had to narrow down my selection to a single writer, I'd probably go with Heidegger.

Relating to the reference I just made to the previous discussion of Rand: It seems like this website format has been changed some, including the login, so I'm being signed in under a name I haven't used in a while. I guess it's also linked to my email address or something. In any case, just pointing out that I'm "Buescher."

my favorite philosopher is diogenes.

hands down. i win.

Ha, this topic's an old chestnut.

Lantern, searching for an honest man, eh? Careful with the wax drippings.

You can make that two for 25 now. I did finish the book because I agree more with her politics than 95% of all other English-speakers, and I was curious why my fellow libertarians were so enthusiastic about her. But I didn't like the book; I didn't like her literary and intellectual style. Rand's prose follows, perhaps unintentionally, a literary tradition called Socialist Realism. Of course, she turned the politics of that genre upside down, but that doesn't change my antipathy to the kind of prose she wrote.

For an exposure of a political philosophy similar to Rand's that I do like and respect, I recommend the early writings of the once over-hyped, now underestimated Herbert Spencer.

My own favorite philosopher? I'd have to roll a dice to decide between the following six philosophers: Locke, Hume, Smith, Mill, Popper, and Dennett.