Seriously, which philosophers are better, and how can I tell?

Question:Mostly it's a test of time and of surviving the challenges of other philosophers' counterarguments. Every reader will have a slightly different idea of which philosophers' shortcomings are worse and which philosophers' insights are most revealing.

IMO the best philosophers are those who don't engage in language games (where the whole argument really depends on the definition of terms, but the arguer doesn't see it, and writes as though the definitions of their terms are absolute and universal and don't need careful dissection). The majority, IMO, go down in flames as navel-gazers, by this criterion.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Mostly it's a test of time and of surviving the challenges of other philosophers' counterarguments. Every reader will have a slightly different idea of which philosophers' shortcomings are worse and which philosophers' insights are most revealing.

IMO the best philosophers are those who don't engage in language games (where the whole argument really depends on the definition of terms, but the arguer doesn't see it, and writes as though the definitions of their terms are absolute and universal and don't need careful dissection). The majority, IMO, go down in flames as navel-gazers, by this criterion.

probably me.

well, because I'm the best, and I said so, that makes me right, so now you know how you can tell.

Would you honestly believe someone simply because they gave their opinion? A philosopher is a lover of knowledge and a seeker of truth. So read, love, and seek. Then know for yourself who is the greatest, and armed with wisdom separate the wheat from the chaff.

There is no such thing as a better philosopher. Ensure that they are consistent in their approach and that their arguments flow into a conclusion. I found Plato, Socrates and Neitzsche to be great starting points.

there is no such thing as a better philosophy as all philosophy seek the same thing although perhaps they approach it different way.

as to how you can tell good philosophy from bad. Well that is for yourself to decide. what i think is fantastic philosophy may be horrible to your ears. That said though an easy way to determine what is good from bad is how you initially reacte to it. if your gut twists and turns at the ideas then you know that isn't good philosophy for you. bare in mind though it may be good philosophy for others and so you should read all philosophies not only for yourself but others. Understand it for what it is not just for how it applies to you.

Plato asked the major questions early on, and provided profound perspectives.

Plotinus realized One Mind Soul-individuation, and is a major perspective.

Husserl realized God qua Pure Ego and Rays of Light, and essentially began one of the two major 20th century trends of thought.

Whitehead was a brilliant thinker, the co-author of a major math project, the only independent formulator of relativity physics beside Einstein, and author of some major insights.

How philosophers are "better" depends on your own awareness and needs. If you're an existential type, Kierkegaard's three spheres of being frame the whole maslowian field: the Aesthetic existential now, the subsequent Ethical reflection on what is important, and the realization that God is within both--the Spiritual or Religious sphere.

If you like a transcendent dynamic, Hegel's "to the things themselves" seemingly grounds Spirit in Matter. Kant provides a 5-sense data stream perspective, very orderly.

A contemporay general-audience philosopher, O. M. Aivanhov, has a collection of talks as "A Philosophy of Universality." Similarly, "The Soulless One," Mark Prophet, heuristically considers the heideggerian question of technology and mechanization of man. "The Path of Virtue," Jonathan Murro, is another lay-friendly, recent compendium of the world's ethical wisdom.

see blixa...