Your Favourite Intellectuals

[josh93248]

Hey everyone, I've been gone for a little bit but now I'm back

Anyway, I've been listening to a lot Christopher Hitchens recently who I've been finding very entertaining and interesting though of course imperfect.

I'm curious, who are you favourite public (Or even not so public) Intellectuals, Thinkers and Philosophers? Either historical or current people are allowed. I want to learn a bit more of what is out there apart from those I already know Like Slavoj Zizek, Richard Dawkins, Noam Chomsky or, of course, Hitchens...

[chopinlover01]

Since you're seeming to go with atheists, check out Sam Harris.

[themeandvariation]

Hey Josh.
For a musical intellectual/philosopher I like Charles Rosen, and Elliot Carter (his  collected essays).

learn a bit more of what is out there

But for one (philosophically) who is really 'out there'… I'd have to give it to Terrence McKenna  

[evryali]

Hey Josh.
For a musical intellectual/philosopher I like Charles Rosen, and Elliot Carter (his  collected essays).
But for one (philosophically) who is really 'out there'… I'd have to give it to Terrence McKenna 

I agree Rosen did a lot of essays and analysis of music.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Like Slavoj Zizek, Richard Dawkins, Noam Chomsky or, of course, Hitchens...

Not a big fan of Hitchens (for political reasons), nor Dawkins, who doesn't seem to have grasped the fact that you can't refute faith by logic; they are inherent opposites and it's like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling. Speaking as an atheist, I actually had to stop reading one of his books, because it was having the reverse effect to what he intended and I wasn't far off questioning my own atheism by the time I was halfway through. Popper was more reasonable. iirc.

Chomsky I like; if you like him you would probably enjoy Kropotkin.

Zizek is absolutely, consistently, hilarious.

[stevensk]

David Hume 1711- 1776   

[iansinclair]

David Hume 1711- 1776   

Oh certainly.  But among the more modern -- Martin Buber, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Soren Kierkegaard, Paul Tillich... for starters...

[stevensk]

Oh certainly.  But among the more modern -- Martin Buber, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Soren Kierkegaard, Paul Tillich... for starters...

No, no no,  David Hume lived long ago but his ideas, philosophy and way of thinking is way more modern and intresting than those teologs you mentioned. Immanuel kant said about Hume that Hume  woke Kant from his ‘dogmatic slumber’.

[thalbergmad]

I like Dawkins. I love the way he destroys tambo bangers.

Thal

[stevensk]

Peter Singer
Derek Parfit
Shelly Kagan
John Rawls

[ted]

Still Aldous Huxley I think, although I strongly disagree with his use of drugs as a mystical catalyst. He has been out of fashion for a long time now, but his written English is beautiful. You can usually spot the odd solecism, the occasional gauche phrase, the tiresome favourite word, in any author, but I struggle to recall any such in Huxley. Sure, most of his novels are deeply couched in the interactions of a of society now considered, and possibly rightly so in some ways, irrelevant, but the undercurrent of speculative conversation and thought he projects through his characters has always stimulated me, and continues to do so.

James Joyce has long been a favourite with me. Finnegans Wake is a glorious tapestry of every imaginable use of language, the sort of writing one can repeatedly return to over a lifetime. There is always someting new to discover and take delight in.

Most probably do not consider J. B. Priestley an intellectual, but his novels and essays are richly permeated by something way beyond the ordinary. Personal and mystical certainly, but in ways which continue to provoke the mind decades after reading him.

I find continued exposure to Hitchens and Dawkins becomes dreary after a while, despite the brilliant repartee of the former and the incisive logic of the latter. They seldom acknowledge the importance of the mystical and the numinous to the human consciousness, which after all, is still a complete mystery.

Another one I like is Douglas Hofstadter.  Admittedly, I found his allegorical explanations of Turing and so on a damned sight harder to follow than reading ordinary mathematics, but in his best moments he is remarkably original and endearingly human. That self-reference might have wide and deep implication, not just in mathematical proof, but in the arts and even our brains, seems to me a pretty plausible notion.

[outin]

Myself obviously.

[josh93248]

Thanks everyone for your replies! I'll have to look some of them up in a couple days as my internet is sort of on the fritz (it's complicated)

I'd just like to say that I acknowledge the imperfections of Hitch and Dawkins, actually I disagree with them more than occasionally but they are (or were) among the most important modern warriors of ideas and thoughts and I generally find them entertaining too.

I know this might be seen as a sort of low way of absorbing ideas but I'm actually most interested in intellectuals not to read but to watch or hear on Youtube and other such places. Between work on music it can be good to get some ideas whilst one is relaxing, reading I find just a little too much effort after, well, reading all the music I read haha.

I'd also request, as well as any other kind of intellectuals, interesting thinkers in the realm of music, some have mentioned Rosen, who I intend to investigate but are there many others? Especially those who can be fount on YT

[chopinlover01]

Oh, I forgot one: Dr. Gad Saad, excellent intellectual. He's a neurological biologist or something like that.
You can find him on YT.

[swagmaster420x]

Still Aldous Huxley I think, although I strongly disagree with his use of drugs as a mystical catalyst. He has been out of fashion for a long time now, but his written English is beautiful. You can usually spot the odd solecism, the occasional gauche phrase, the tiresome favourite word, in any author, but I struggle to recall any such in Huxley. Sure, most of his novels are deeply couched in the interactions of a of society now considered, and possibly rightly so in some ways, irrelevant, but the undercurrent of speculative conversation and thought he projects through his characters has always stimulated me, and continues to do so.

The beginning of Brave New World was one of the most annoying things I read, that's why I put the book down immediately.

[ted]

"Island" and "Brave New World" are exceptions to the general drift of his other novels, in that they are didactic, portraying examples of what he considered good and bad societies. Both are written in much simpler, direct, and possibly less beautiful English than most of the other novels and essays.