Nietzsche or however you spell it... his thoughts were dull and had no meaning... he just tried to hard to be controversial with all that God is dead crap... idiot.
Yes - Kant for his protracted, Christian redundancy and dead logic. Sartre - for writing 500 + page books about nothing.
Yes, look at the question just before this one..."if a tree falls..." Now that's boring.
no,no philosopher can be boring.
Yes - Heidegger and Kierkegaard. Heidegger because he was so difficult to read, especially considering what he really said in the end and Kierkegaard because he was so single minded about Christianity.
...every metaphysical investigation must start from reality as it is in our experience, i.e., from existent reality, and seek to determine what it is in its finiteness, i.e., in its existence and in its temporal possibilities for developing the different forms of its own existence. Therefore, the initial problem of philosophy must be the following: Why am I here, rather than not existing at all? If I am able to determine the essence of the existent being, then I know what being is.
For example on Heidegger...
http://www.radicalacademy.com/adiphiexis...In his attempt to inquire into the
nature of existence, Heidegger distinguishes two ways of living: the one, inferior, called the unauthentic; the other, superior, called the authentic. Unauthentic existence is an uncritical participation in the world as it is; authentic existence consists in an analysis of self. Although distinct, the unauthentic and the authentic life have some common characteristics:
For Example a summary of Kierkegaard by
http://www.radicalacademy.com/adiphiexis...To exist as an individual, it is necessary to be withdrawn from the entire world. The individual then is aware of himself -- that he exists -- and this is the greatest and most terrible thing. Indeed, on one hand, the individual recognizes that he is created by God, and hence that he comes from nothing. But at the same time this is the most terrible thing, for to exist -- as the etymology of the word indicates -- is "to stand out," "to emerge from"; the finite existent being is detached from God. Thus I must recognize that my existence denotes a detachment, an opposition to God.
"Boring" is subjective...
For a *lot* of people, all philosophers are boring. Some see the discussion of un-provable concepts and idea as fruitless.
For those who do find interest in philosophy, still many would find the philosophical inquest into the matter of free will dreadfully boring, others would find it fascinating. It's all personally subjective because most philosophers concentrated on specific subsets of philosophy.
Personally, though, I have trouble reading the ancient Greek/Roman philosophers such as Socrates and Aristotle. There are very significant philosophical points and ideas contained within their writing that make reading their works (i.e., The Apology, Nicomachean Ethics) worthwhile... but sometimes it is very hard to keep your interest piqued until you hit that rare gem of an idea that carries you on.
But in general, philosophers usually aren't the greatest writers and have a hard time appealing to non-philosopher audiences. Even some of the greater of the modern philosophical writers (such as Daniel Dennett) have their lows in their writing that you find yourself yawning through.
On the other side, however, one of the greater philosophical works I've read (although it's classification as philosophy is debated by some) was "God's Debris," by Scott Adams. (The same guy who draws the Dilbert comic... but there's no Dilbert and no comedy in this book.) You can actually download the eBook of God's Debris (free) from link contained on the site listed below.
Are You Telling Me, YOU DON'T KNOW ! ! !
If I can work it out, it only proves any SIMPLETON should be able to.
Any Philosopher is boring, IF YOU WANT THAT PHILOSOPHER TO BE BORING. If you show some interest, any Philosopher will be INTERESTING ! ! !
Yes. The writing of most philosophers is quite turgid--at least in part. This makes them boring. Perhaps the champion bore is Immanuel Kant.
Harleigh Kyson Jr.
...they can be redundant in expression, but I have not found any philosopher to be boring for their reasoning...just the opposite...sometimes, the initial comprehension eludes me
...the one whom I have enjoyed reading is not really labeled a philosopher up front, but was very much a gifted philosopher whose close friend was an eye for life in it's simplest form.......Robert Frost
I don't believe there is a boring philosopher.
I do believe that there is a bored listener though.....
And a bored pupil!! Socrate's pupil!! hehehe