Who was the most influential philosopher of the 20th century

philosophy is for gay boys

Probably Camus, in the sense that the dominant ideology in the face of religious decay and nihilism is just awkwardly shrugging it off and continuing to push that boulder while trying to convince yourself that you're happy.

>>8360137
ehh..i see him more as a writer than a philosopher...


the only answer to this question, honestly is Wittgenstein.......maybe Heidegger as well

Heidegger, no contest.

>>8360172
its either him or Wittgenstein

>>8360166
Real philosophisers aren't very influential.

LOL continental philosophy is a joke

Analytical Philosophy is where its at...which is why i go for Witty

>>8360201
>austrian christian mystic
>not continental

>>8360179

While they both set the agenda for the two main competing schools of philosophy for the rest of the century, I vote Heidegger because Heidegger was influential not only in academic philosophy but also in popular culture, through existentialism. Heidegger also continues to exert great influence on academic philosophy and its various offshoots (ugh, deconstruction) today, whereas Wittgenstein's influence has faded with time. I could be wrong about the latter, though; I don't do analytic philosophy.

>>8360119

Nick Land

>>8360202
Wittgenstein was Jewish not a Christian?

>>8360659
He was raised Catholic although he had Jewish heritage, which his family refuted. Wittgenstein himself tried to prove that him and his sisters are not Jewish so they would omit nazi repercussions. In terms of faith he wasn't a believer but respected Catholicism very much and apparently had many Catholic friends like GEM Anscombe

>>8360704
many jews were self hating....look at Kafka, i'm not surprised

but even then Wittgenstein fits more so in the Analytic tradition than the Continental tradition

>>8360708
You don't have to be self-hating to be a ethnically Jewish Christian.

>>8360708
I am not>>8360202 and after all I think you're right. Just wanted to give you insight to Wittgenstein's religious views. And yes he was hating on Judaism but his family's conversion to Catholicism started with his father Karl not him

>>8360172
This, every other answer is wrong.

was it true that Heidegger was a Nazi Sympathizer?

>>8360799
No, he was a literal card carrying Nazi.

>>8360708
Kafka wasn't self-hating because he was a Jew. He was just a tad bit /r9k/ and his dad didn't respect him.

>>8360119
The answer is Heidegger. Even if I don't agree with most of his philosophy, I'm pretty sure the most academic theses of philosophy ever written were on Plato and Heidegger.

>>8360799
Yeah but he became semi-disillusioned when his own philosophy failed to predict accurately what the Nazi movement strengths were to be (technology).

He didn't have a resolution to this (IMO) and just acted all insulted when people asked him to apologize.

>>8360119
Depends on what field. Heidegger and Arendt for instance had a lot of influence on politics and in Heideggers case also aesthetics, while Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein had a lot of influence on philosophy of language and logic.

Feyerabend, Kuhn and Popper also had massive influence on philosophy of science.

>>8360922

Agree. It's either Heidegger or Kant.

Anyone else find Wittgenstein to be an analytic Heidegger?

They both come out of Kierkegaard imo and critiqued metaphysics.

>>8360945
Good post.

As he said, it's important to concrete what field, but also to set a time: we can consider it the present or a projection in the future; Deleuze, Foucault are from the late XX century, so their influence is setting more and more nowadays. As Foucault said, "one century will be deleuzian". That century is coming, just that.

Before puking me with your hate consider that the philosophers considered are mainly from the first half of XX century. The only post which considered philosophers of the lates XXs is the one I cited.

>>8360961
Could be, yeah.

>>8360985
I think Foucault and Deleuze are the only interesting post-structural philosophers.

Didn't they have a falling out?

>>8360961
You're one among many my friend. Good of you to see it.

>>8360998
Well, they are not the same person so there was a difference (kek).

Jokes apart, I don't know. Anyway I think they were in the same boat and also had similar praxis in social and political life, so little discussions apart, I don't think they had a bad relationship.

>>8361006
Well, I haven't really read much of Wittgenstein but that was my superficial impression.

>>8361021
I want to tell you to kill yourself for some reason.

I'm sorry I can't read any of that French stuff

Kant