Talk:Contemporary philosophy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Contemporary philosophy article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
Jordan Peterson?
Should we add him? Especially his evolutionary approach - https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/389822-philosopher-jordan-peterson-will-change-the-world.Sourcerery (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- No. He is a public intellectual, but as far as I can tell not a professional philosopher. I am not insulting him, this just isn't the field he works in. I'm sure he publishes claims about biology in his work, but that doesn't make him a biologist anymore than making appeals to philosophy in his popularizing work makes him a philosopher. And he's a psychologist, I believe. If he ever publishes in a peer-reviewed philosophy journal then my vote might change. Who "The Hill" or any newspaper or journalist/news outlet calls a "philosopher" doesn't really matter. If we do add him, then he belongs in the "Outside the profession" section alongside Ayn Rand, because he isn't a working philosopher. - Atfyfe (talk) 00:33, 8 May 2019 (UTC)