We discuss the main reasons for her rejection by most professional philosophers in the first section.
This bit of the quote clearly implies that philosophers in the academia don’t consider Rand a philosopher themselves.
The fact that Rand is discussed among some philosophers doesn’t necessarily make Rand a philosopher- you can discuss Kant’s ideas in psychology courses, but Kant himself isn’t a psychologist (namely, he even thought of psychology as a pseudoscience).
Man I’ve been gone from the forums for like three whole years! It’s still firing on all cylinders!
Just another Zaphius moment, last month it was implying black people are only poor because they’re lazy, this month it’s implying people are less interlectual because of their profession.
I dearly hope no one outside of forum regulars is reading this thread right now.
I never implied that?
But I wouldn’t be surprised if you were to find a positive correlation between being a farmer and not giving a sh1t about contemporary philosophy. Perhaps you can prove me wrong with a source that claims otherwise?
What are you, 12! Stop being embarrassed over your hobbies!
Rejection by ‘professional philosophers’ (academia in the West is increasingly co-opted by left-wing demagogues, so I wonder why they reject her views…) doesn’t make her any less a philosopher. Your link doesn’t refute that she is one. What’s your meme, here?
me after attending one university lecture
https:// imgur .com /a/wIZWUqG After reading this thread I believe I’ve cracked the real cosmology of Warcraft (can’t post links pls forgive)
the proofs, hand them over
Source? Can you source that? Who are you citing when you make this post?
Source : 1 website link
Can you cite his necessity to link a source?
Thanks.
All posts beyond this point need to make sure you’re using Harvard referencing, btw.
Substantiate your claims
People in tough situations tend to ponder a lot! Trust me, I know!
The link presents all positions, as an encyclopedia is meant to do. It states that the majority of people who work in the field don’t acknowledge her as a philosopher (this has to do with her style, her political affiliation isn’t relevant). You can draw your conclusions from that.
Why I like this conversation? Because to me, that proves that even when faced with evidence, you’ll go in full denial.
Cringe image take it down
i am going to need an academically cited paper as a source for anything you claim from now on
also you’re a loser, perhaps you can prove me wrong with a source that claims otherwise?
