Topics Philosophy

Question Is it dumb to ask someone, especially a philosopher, the following question. Who's your favorite philosopher? This strikes me as a rather dumb question to ask. Something akin to asking a physicist, "Who's your favorite scientist?" If it's true that the question is dumb, why is it dumb? Or why not?

Accepted:
September 29, 2011

Comments

Great question! Perhaps one reason one might be shy (but not dumb!) about asking someone who is their favorite philosopher is because questions about who is the favorite suggests something about liking or disliking, as in 'what is your favorite music?' which seems to involve asking "what kind of music do you like to listen to?'. In philosophy, though, someone might think some view is correct like utilitarianism but not like the theory or those who endorse it. Some philosophers also seem to be drawn to engage in theories they find wrong-headed; on this view, some atheists may be thought of as having theism as their favorite philosophy, even though (for them) it is their favorite view to attack! Be that as it may, it is clear that throughout history, many philosophers have had favorite philosophers. Aquinas's favorite philosopher was Aristotle, for example, Dennett loves Ryle, and so on. As for an analogy with science, I suspect a scientist should respect the question about whom he or she most admires in the history of science or, to use your example, the history and field of physics. It is certainly true that many scientists have a favorite branch of science, and so asking them about which scientists they most admire seems fair game.

I don't think that it is a dumb question either to ask a natural scientist who her favorite scientist is or to ask a philosopher who her favorite philosopher is, although I am inclined to think that there are very different bases for the answers that might be given that reflect differences between philosophy and natural science. To be sure, the question might be taken in different ways: it might be taken to mean, for example, which philosopher or natural scientist one most admires, or with whose work one feels the most affinity, or whom one takes as one's model in doing one's own work. All these forms of the question admit of answers both by the philosopher or the natural scientist. However, it seems to me that there is a sense in which the question could be taken by a philosopher that is not open to a natural scientist (unless the natural scientist is interested in work in the history of the natural science in which she works): the question could be taken to mean which philosopher's work one most enjoys reading, or, to take a more extreme version of the question, which philosopher's work the philosopher would bring to a desert island, if s/he could bring work only by one philosopher. It seems to me that this answer isn't open to a natural scientist who doesn't do theoretical work or is interested in the history of the natural science in which she works, and the reason I take this to be the case is because I see natural science as an enterprise that seeks to resolve problems, whereas philosophy, although it treats of problems, and can be seen as consisting of a set of problems--indeed, it is often seen this way and taught this way, especially in introductory courses--can, I think, also be seen as consisting of a set of texts that have been produced across history. In this respect, philosophy is, I think, quite different from the natural sciences, and is, indeed, more akin to literature. And so just as it wouldn't be dumb to ask some fiction or non-fiction writer who her favorite writer is, it's not dumb to ask of a philosopher who her favorite philosopher is. (To be sure, a philosopher who maintains that philosophy is only, or properly, seen as a set of problems would reject the foregoing; I myself think, however, that it is an interesting fact about philosophy that it can be seen both as a set of problems and as a set of texts, and that this reveals something interesting about the very nature of philosophy itself.)