Difference between revisions of "Talk:Philosophy"
m (-) |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Great work. I just recovered some valuable material. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 23:41, 23 May 2008 (EDT) | Great work. I just recovered some valuable material. --[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 23:41, 23 May 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : Nice. My area of expertise is in Analytic philosophy and to a lesser extent German phenomenology, so I'm a bit in the dark with the others. If you concentrate your efforts there, we can probably avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. [[User:NosnhoJE|NosnhoJE]] 00:06, 24 May 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 04:06, May 24, 2008
I'm just trying to make a dent in the Special:Wantedpages, any help on this article would be greatly appreciated. Thanks -ColinR 04:44, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
I'm working on improving this page and the other pages in the philosophy category. Is anybody a Continental, by chance? NosnhoJE 02:22, 14 May 2008 (EDT)
Notability?
I don't think Niebuhr and Hartshorne are really notable figures in American philosophy, and Mills was a sociologist, not a philosopher. If you want American philosophers of religion in there, the obvious choices should be Plantinga and Hick. But - on that note - "American philosophy" is really limited to Pragmatism (or Peirce's 'pragmaticism', since he hated James), in the 20th century most famously championed by Rorty. Other than that, the meaningful distinction is (as I noted in the top section) the divide between Analytic and "Continental" philosophy. Rawls, for example, is squarely in the Analytic camp, not the American (read: Pragmatic) camp.
- May be my source is not as good as yours, please improve it as it should be. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 19:31, 23 May 2008 (EDT)
- I'm working on it. For reference, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is probably the best overall web resource, but it's more specialist articles and less general information. Most of what I'm adding right is common-knowledge (for professional philosophers, I suppose) but probably needs sourcing for an encyclopedia. Unfortunately, most of my library is still packed from a recent move. I'll improve that as I unpack. Cheers! NosnhoJE 19:48, 23 May 2008 (EDT)
Great work. I just recovered some valuable material. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 23:41, 23 May 2008 (EDT)
- Nice. My area of expertise is in Analytic philosophy and to a lesser extent German phenomenology, so I'm a bit in the dark with the others. If you concentrate your efforts there, we can probably avoid unnecessary duplication of effort. NosnhoJE 00:06, 24 May 2008 (EDT)