thoughts on saul Kripke

better call him & find out xD

>>8718389

genius.

>>8718401
joke was good, man

>>8718402
he is?

>>8718389
genius. Start with Frege

>>8718469

can someone explain to me what kripke did that he is called a genius?

>>8719259
Math/Logic:
Kripke-Platek Set Theory, Model Theory for Modal Logics and/or Kripke Semantics

Philosophy: Work on "rigid designators" and proper names, reference, and commentary on Wittgenstein, modal arguments against mid-body identity

>>8719294
*mind-body identity

>>8719294
so is Kripke the greatest analytical philosopher of all time essentially?

>>8719527

kind of like saying you got the best grades in special ed

>>8719536
funny.....but i think it probably takes more genius to be the best at analytical philosophy than poetry *cough* i mean continental philosophy

>>8719556
if anything a continental philosopher is a subversive historian, with exceptions of course

Can we say Kripke is probably the greatest American philosopher of all time?

>>8719949
He and Quine are pretty much tied for the top spot.

>>8720139
seems true

>>8718389
he a smart nigga

>>8720139
>>8720189
don't forget Putnam, he's on the same level no doubt.

>>8720222
I new I was missing someone, I think you're right.

>>8720234
*gnu

>>8720222

do the pragmatists deserve to be up there with Quine, Kripke, Putnam

i know pragmatism has alot of criticism to it, but they really are the only 3 american philosophers that created an original philosophical school

if not all 3 then at least Pierce who seems to be quite the polymath

Rorty, brandom, mcdowell, sellars, quine...

>>8720139
>>8719949
This all really depends on who we're willing to recognize as philosophers; both as regards America, and the rest of the world. If we're willing to recognize logicians and others philosophically oriented mathematicians, computer scientiats, and linguists, then things completely change. In addition to Kripke, other top American philosophers include C. S. Peirce, David Lewis, Noam Chomsky, Yehoshua Bar-Hillel, Stephen Cole Kleene, Willard van Orman Quite, Richard Montague, Haskell Curry, Marshall Stone, William James, John Dewey, and John Searle.

>>8720425
I don't understand a single fucking word Brandom has ever said

>>8720472
Oh and Putnam. In fact Putnam (rest his poor soul) was something of a contemporary polymath - as is Chomsky.

>>8720472
oh shit David Lewis. This is a really good list, but with a narrow definition, Quine, Kripke, Putnam, Lewis. Widen it a little and Chomsky and James and maybe Dewey should get in there.

Don't remember much about his work, but he mentored my metaphysics professor who was a huge, dismissive douchebag.

>>8720139
Well, James and Peirce.

>>8720479
Transferring to University of Maryland College park in the spring for Philosophy ("cognitive studies specialization") and linguistics, and I can't wait. If anyone e is like really into like linguisitics and philosophy of mind/language, then you've probably heard of Peter Caruthers, Norbert Hornstein, and Howard Lasnik. They all teach at teach at my school. Right now I'm going to a shit tier University called "University of Baltimore", and I'm hoping this will being a more genuinely academic and intellectual environment.

Sorry I'm just kind of autistically bringing up my personal life because it seems we've veered in the direction of precisely the philosophical material I study. I'm mainly interested in Montague semantics, pragmatics, and cognitive linguistics. I also have a general interest in formal language theory/automata theory and mathematical methods of natural and formal language analysis (I think category theory and topology may have a very promising place in the future of linguistics and philosophy (for any non mathfags, category theory is completely different from set theory)).

>>8720479
is Chomsky still influential in linguistics, i have often heard alot of his work led linguistics down a bad path

>>8720522
that's awesome friendo, I know of Peter Caruthers but had no idea he was at UMD. Sounds like things are going to work out for you.

>>8720564
That what some people say, but in reality its not true. From what I've seen people usually make this claim before proceeding to criticize his political writing (they seem to be attempting to undermine his intellectual legitimacy, so to speak, in a fallacious attempt to attack his politics).

>>8720579
Yeah, they have a few other decent but lesser known philosophers as well.

Sort of relating to all that, I have a question for anyone willing to answer. Despite how things might appear based on my previous posts, I'm actually pretty articulate (I was using my phone earlier). Given that I go to a decent school (University of Maryland, College Park), have a 162 Math, 164 Reading, 5.5 writing GRE, but will probably graduate with like 3.2 GPA, would I be able to get into a top tier school? Also I might be able to get the GRE scores up and get some research experience before graduating. I also assume I would have a pretty good writing sample, so what are my chances? I'd like to go into a cognitive science or linguistics program at a top 15 university.

>>8720473
His prose is literally worse then shit like Heidegger and Sartre. Not nearly as bad a say Deleuze though. Its probably comparable to Husserl.

Making it Explicit was a really tough nut to crack, but another book of his, Between Saying and Doing is a lot more PHILOSOPHICALLY and STYLISTICALLY accessible, but less so mathematically. I was actually really disappointed upon discovering his work (at around age 19; 2 years ago) because at the time, I was really starting to become proficient at philosophy and I was in the process of developing a lot of very similar ideas to Brandom and this other guys Dan Sperber, but with less of a normative and more of a metaphysical bent (with a lot of influence from Wittgenstein, Alfred North Whitehead, and this guy Alfred Korzybski). I moved on though and have other stuff brewing in my mind, so to speak. Hopefully one day some of it'll be published in some modest academic journal.

>>8719536
Continentalfags are

O B S E S S E D

>>8720816
which philosophers are you reading now?

>>8721193
David Dowty's textbook on Montague Semantics and this other book by this psychologist John Watson (he was an influential proponent and researcher in the field of behaviorism). Recently I've also read some John Searle (I've read a lot of his work), Jerrold Katz, and this guy Ronald Langacker.

Next on my reading list is this anthology "Readings in Philosophy and Cognitive Science" and also a textbook on generative grammar (I've already read a few books on the subject).

I also study math. Most recently I learned some group theory and now I'm just starting a book on number theory.

Isn't Brandom a pragmatist?

>>8722027
i think so