In the comments below, please write your vote for which philosopher we should read to end the semester, along with a sentence or two explaining why. Make sure your name is included so I know that everyone voted!
I would like to vote for Blaise Pascal because I think that his famous wager is super interesting and important. I also agree with his sentiment that the Jesuits are not the greatest (the Dominicans are, of course).
Rachel Kraff
I would also like to vote for Blaise Pascal. As a person who is generally agnostic, I have never believed in God (or felt the need to). With Pascal’s wager, I was given a very compelling argument that genuinely made me question whether or not I should believe in God. According to the wager, I can only benefit from believing in God, so why would I not? I would like to learn more about Pascal because he has brought up theories that have made me actually question my personal beliefs.
foconnor
I (Fionn) will be voting for Francis Bacon. I think it would be fascinating to learn more about inductive methodology and its affects on science. In particular, I’d like to learn more about how he was able to defend his ideas against the commonly held scientific practices of his time, and I’d also like to read the rest of his prerogative truths.
Kofi Opoku
I cast my vote for Michel de Montaigne as I think he has one of the more interesting backstories in terms of notable philosophers, and he has many parallels to my chosen philosopher; Pierre Bayle, especially in terms of their shared position of Skepticism. Beyond that, I would like to learn more about Montaigne’s Pyrrhonism and his Essays, as well as how they would influence Cartesianism.
pflynn5
It was a difficult decision but after reading numerous websites I’ve decided to cast my vote for Adam Smith. In my eyes his political and economic philosophy was far more grounded in scientific principles and empirical observations than many of the more metaphysical thinkers of the era. The idea of self interest being good (the invisible hand) and the idea of positive externalities (Devine providence) are both important and applicable ideas even today.
zdeng11
I would like to vote for Niccolò Machiavelli. I think more awareness on moral and political philosophy would be beneficial for this class (especially in modern philosophy, since Machiavelli’s arguments are in some ways relevant to our society.) The Prince is also really interesting and thought provoking, and we should at least touch upon some of Machiavelli’s philosophies.
Zining Deng
mnorris9
I guess I’m adding to the streak right now and voting for Pascal. I’d vaguely heard of Pascal’s wager, but now that I know what the big fuss about it is I think it’s super interesting and he definitely deserves a spot on the syllabus.
hott
I would like to vote for Mary Astell because I think she presented some really interesting and radical feminist views for her time, especially with regards to the institution of marriage and her use of Descartes’ mind-body dualism to promote intellectual equality. I also think that there could be some great parallels between Astell and SorJuana on not only feminist ideology but the importance of education.
cabdulla
I would like to vote for Adam Smith. My main reason for picking him is his relevance to the modern day. Though I do not agree with his ideas, I still acknowledge that they are important to learn about. There is also a valuable discussion about the economy to be had when discussing Smith, and I appreciate philosophy that can be easily applied to the real world, like political theory, and unlike metaphysics. I also think that Smith’s stance on slavery (and generally his relationship with Hume’s philosophy) is interesting.
sarno13
I (sage) would like to vote for Mary Astell. I really enjoyed Astell’s use of Cartesian dualism as a means of arguing for equality for women, and I appreciate the use of Descartes’ philosophy to argue for social justice. Furthermore, I am interested by the variety of philosophy she uses to form her own thought, including Christian morals and Platonism. Finally think that Astell could be situated well in next year’s curriculum as a link between the work of Descartes and Sor Juana.
cgangi
I (Christina) would like to vote for Anne Conway. Her ideas about the hierarchy of species present a very unique way to explain God’s role in our world. It seems like she is extremely religious, but her hierarchy almost functions as a slightly more secular metaphor for God and Jesus Christ. I think her philosophy is very thorough and can stand up to counterarguments. I also like her use of the word “creatures.”
scrowel2
Francis Bacon would be the best choice to add to our class. His importance for the history of science and history of philosophy seems like it could add to our understanding of society today and our own relationships to science and epistemology. Thinking of his role in the development of science and its breaking away from philosophy, Francis Bacon is either a key figure in the development of western society or one of its great prophets. I am most interested in his scientific methods and his part in dismantling long-held and unchallenged philosophical beliefs of the time to help bring about the scientific revolution by moving from deductive to inductive reasoning. His connection to Newton also feels relevant, and Newton without Bacon seems on his own in this course (poor Isaac) at least as far as what we would now call science goes. I would like to see more history of science, and Bacon seems like a good fit. I’ve also really only heard negative things about Bacon in the context of environmental and nature rhetoric in my literary studies, so I was enjoying reading and listening to a website dedicated to how cool he actually may have been.
mlevereth
I (michelle) would like to vote for Blaise Pascal. I was very moved by his approach to persuasion, as he presents his evidence in a way that makes it seem as if he has no part in your decision. He is not convincing you to believe in God, he instead is just giving you the evidence and you are making your own decision. It felt very non-intrusive, unlike many other arguments for believing in God, which are often hostile or manipulative.
agadgil
I (Anish) would like to vote for Adam Smith. In many respects, I see this class, in discussing this time period, focusing in on the interchange between philosophy and what would later be “daughter disciplines” that grew out of the discourse of the time: politics, natural science, mathematics. Another such discipline is economics (and social sciences more broadly), and the thinker that seems to most appropriately lie at its specific interchange with the philosophical discourse of the time is Adam Smith.
xgeng3
I (Xuewen) would like to vote for Mary Astell. Her arguments that advocate for the equality of men and women are very enlightening. One argument I found interesting is how she argues that rationality should be at the top of the hierarchy of God’s creation, and thus men and women should be treated equally since only human bodies are sexed, but not human minds. I think she will fit in the class schedule well with Sor Juana’s arguments. In addition, their philosophical arguments both represent social movements during this period we focusing on in this class.
(Vaibhav) My vote goes for the Montesquieu as I find his philosophy of ‘Separation of powers’ the foundation block of many successful governments in the world. The checks and balances on the nobility and the monarch paved the wave for the three parts of the government that we witness in today’s world. The executive, legislative, and the judiciary are the main pillars of the democracies around the world and to think that someone in the 18th century came up with this idea really intrigues me. Would like to see his work in the syllabus for sure!
Yama Xu
I (Yama Xu) would like to vote for Adam Smith. I find his self-interest theory very crucial to the foundation of micro-behaviors and aggregate level outcomes. It is helpful to understand the philosophy of economics and political science. We do not seem to have much readings in this area and I think it would be interesting to see his work in the syllabus next semester 🙂
eprichar
(Everett) My vote is for Francis Bacon. I find his views on induction and general scientific method very pertinent to the empiricist discussion we have towards the end of this class with Hume, Reid, and Shepherd. Even though he did much of his work a century before these other philosophers, he still has unique insights on how we can methodologically grow our knowledge in an unbiased way through his brand of induction. He also seems extremely influential to so many of the philosophers already on the syllabus, and including him could add more context to these readings.
I would like to vote for Blaise Pascal because I think that his famous wager is super interesting and important. I also agree with his sentiment that the Jesuits are not the greatest (the Dominicans are, of course).
I would also like to vote for Blaise Pascal. As a person who is generally agnostic, I have never believed in God (or felt the need to). With Pascal’s wager, I was given a very compelling argument that genuinely made me question whether or not I should believe in God. According to the wager, I can only benefit from believing in God, so why would I not? I would like to learn more about Pascal because he has brought up theories that have made me actually question my personal beliefs.
I (Fionn) will be voting for Francis Bacon. I think it would be fascinating to learn more about inductive methodology and its affects on science. In particular, I’d like to learn more about how he was able to defend his ideas against the commonly held scientific practices of his time, and I’d also like to read the rest of his prerogative truths.
I cast my vote for Michel de Montaigne as I think he has one of the more interesting backstories in terms of notable philosophers, and he has many parallels to my chosen philosopher; Pierre Bayle, especially in terms of their shared position of Skepticism. Beyond that, I would like to learn more about Montaigne’s Pyrrhonism and his Essays, as well as how they would influence Cartesianism.
It was a difficult decision but after reading numerous websites I’ve decided to cast my vote for Adam Smith. In my eyes his political and economic philosophy was far more grounded in scientific principles and empirical observations than many of the more metaphysical thinkers of the era. The idea of self interest being good (the invisible hand) and the idea of positive externalities (Devine providence) are both important and applicable ideas even today.
I would like to vote for Niccolò Machiavelli. I think more awareness on moral and political philosophy would be beneficial for this class (especially in modern philosophy, since Machiavelli’s arguments are in some ways relevant to our society.) The Prince is also really interesting and thought provoking, and we should at least touch upon some of Machiavelli’s philosophies.
Zining Deng
I guess I’m adding to the streak right now and voting for Pascal. I’d vaguely heard of Pascal’s wager, but now that I know what the big fuss about it is I think it’s super interesting and he definitely deserves a spot on the syllabus.
I would like to vote for Mary Astell because I think she presented some really interesting and radical feminist views for her time, especially with regards to the institution of marriage and her use of Descartes’ mind-body dualism to promote intellectual equality. I also think that there could be some great parallels between Astell and SorJuana on not only feminist ideology but the importance of education.
I would like to vote for Adam Smith. My main reason for picking him is his relevance to the modern day. Though I do not agree with his ideas, I still acknowledge that they are important to learn about. There is also a valuable discussion about the economy to be had when discussing Smith, and I appreciate philosophy that can be easily applied to the real world, like political theory, and unlike metaphysics. I also think that Smith’s stance on slavery (and generally his relationship with Hume’s philosophy) is interesting.
I (sage) would like to vote for Mary Astell. I really enjoyed Astell’s use of Cartesian dualism as a means of arguing for equality for women, and I appreciate the use of Descartes’ philosophy to argue for social justice. Furthermore, I am interested by the variety of philosophy she uses to form her own thought, including Christian morals and Platonism. Finally think that Astell could be situated well in next year’s curriculum as a link between the work of Descartes and Sor Juana.
I (Christina) would like to vote for Anne Conway. Her ideas about the hierarchy of species present a very unique way to explain God’s role in our world. It seems like she is extremely religious, but her hierarchy almost functions as a slightly more secular metaphor for God and Jesus Christ. I think her philosophy is very thorough and can stand up to counterarguments. I also like her use of the word “creatures.”
Francis Bacon would be the best choice to add to our class. His importance for the history of science and history of philosophy seems like it could add to our understanding of society today and our own relationships to science and epistemology. Thinking of his role in the development of science and its breaking away from philosophy, Francis Bacon is either a key figure in the development of western society or one of its great prophets. I am most interested in his scientific methods and his part in dismantling long-held and unchallenged philosophical beliefs of the time to help bring about the scientific revolution by moving from deductive to inductive reasoning. His connection to Newton also feels relevant, and Newton without Bacon seems on his own in this course (poor Isaac) at least as far as what we would now call science goes. I would like to see more history of science, and Bacon seems like a good fit. I’ve also really only heard negative things about Bacon in the context of environmental and nature rhetoric in my literary studies, so I was enjoying reading and listening to a website dedicated to how cool he actually may have been.
I (michelle) would like to vote for Blaise Pascal. I was very moved by his approach to persuasion, as he presents his evidence in a way that makes it seem as if he has no part in your decision. He is not convincing you to believe in God, he instead is just giving you the evidence and you are making your own decision. It felt very non-intrusive, unlike many other arguments for believing in God, which are often hostile or manipulative.
I (Anish) would like to vote for Adam Smith. In many respects, I see this class, in discussing this time period, focusing in on the interchange between philosophy and what would later be “daughter disciplines” that grew out of the discourse of the time: politics, natural science, mathematics. Another such discipline is economics (and social sciences more broadly), and the thinker that seems to most appropriately lie at its specific interchange with the philosophical discourse of the time is Adam Smith.
I (Xuewen) would like to vote for Mary Astell. Her arguments that advocate for the equality of men and women are very enlightening. One argument I found interesting is how she argues that rationality should be at the top of the hierarchy of God’s creation, and thus men and women should be treated equally since only human bodies are sexed, but not human minds. I think she will fit in the class schedule well with Sor Juana’s arguments. In addition, their philosophical arguments both represent social movements during this period we focusing on in this class.
(Vaibhav) My vote goes for the Montesquieu as I find his philosophy of ‘Separation of powers’ the foundation block of many successful governments in the world. The checks and balances on the nobility and the monarch paved the wave for the three parts of the government that we witness in today’s world. The executive, legislative, and the judiciary are the main pillars of the democracies around the world and to think that someone in the 18th century came up with this idea really intrigues me. Would like to see his work in the syllabus for sure!
I (Yama Xu) would like to vote for Adam Smith. I find his self-interest theory very crucial to the foundation of micro-behaviors and aggregate level outcomes. It is helpful to understand the philosophy of economics and political science. We do not seem to have much readings in this area and I think it would be interesting to see his work in the syllabus next semester 🙂
(Everett) My vote is for Francis Bacon. I find his views on induction and general scientific method very pertinent to the empiricist discussion we have towards the end of this class with Hume, Reid, and Shepherd. Even though he did much of his work a century before these other philosophers, he still has unique insights on how we can methodologically grow our knowledge in an unbiased way through his brand of induction. He also seems extremely influential to so many of the philosophers already on the syllabus, and including him could add more context to these readings.
Убийство на ферме уайтхауз
Батя фильм
movies.vipspark.ru