Opinion: Who is the most underrated/under read Philosopher?
I will start… I find Aesop and the Fables to be underrated and wrongly pointed at simply for children. These stories can and must be applied to adult life to live a better and more virtuous life. IMO.
(Yes, I am aware that some think Aesop was potentially not one person, but many, and some question he even existed… like Homer).
Would love to hear what you all think.
Aquinas?
Sad, that it is so empty here. Maybe the difficulty is the definition of when a philosopher can be considered underrated or under-read? How would one make that assessment? What barrier needs to be overcome to make a philosopher no longer underrated or even overrated?
Off the top of my head, I would propose most Greek philosophers, aside from the famous ones. But really any country has their history of philosophy.
Side note: I guess the most under-read philosophers are those whose works are no longer available to us and can thus no longer be read :c
Charles Sanders Pierce. Founder of the only American school of philosophy: pragmatism. Also one of the greatest minds American has ever produced; a real polymath. He was a very capable mathematician, worked in the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, worked astronomy studying star brightness, critical contributor in the field of semiotics and logic, and started the pragmatic philosophical tradition.
Thanks for the suggestion. I had never heard of him before. Which of his works would you recommend as a starter?
He wrote more articles than books. I think you kind of have 2 routes to go:
- The Academic Primary Text Route and pick up either a reader like Menand’s “Pragmatism: A Reader” or get “The Essential Peirce” which comes in 2 volumes to see the actual work.
- The Historical Route and pick up Louis Menand’s “The Metaphysical Club” which is a historical accoutthat defines this emerging American thought based on a dinner club that featured Philosophers Charles Peirce and William James, and Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes Junior.
I think 2 is probably good if you want more historical context, narrative, and summary of their ideas, but route 1 gives you the direct text which is less accessible for casual reading in my opinion. I will say that I do sometimes think James is correct in his criticism of Peirce’s writing being “flashes of brilliant light relieved against Cimmerian darkness.”
