I figured this would be a good place to post a list like this. My only concern is how to handle philosophers with no surviving works, like Socrates, Epicurus, and Pythagoreas.

These philosophers have been chosen for their historical impact, initial impact, influence at various points in human history, and influence on modern thought.

(In no particular order as of now)

John Locke
John-Jacques Rousseau
Voltaire
Aristotle
Jean-Paul Sartre
Friedrich Nietzsche
Thomas Aquinas
St. Augustine
Plato
Sun Tzu
David Hume
Albert Camus
Noam Chomsky
Ayn Rand (as much as I hate her)
Immanuel Kant
Rene Descartes
Søren Kierkegaard
Avicenna
Confucius
Niccolo Machiavelli
Bertrand Russell
Thomas Hobbes
John Calvin
Karl Marx
Arthur Schopenhauer
Hilary Putnam
Gottfried Leibniz
John Stuart Mill
Francis Bacon
Henry David Thoreau
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Jeremy Bentham
Adam Smith
Baruch Spinoza
Pope Gregory I
Georg Friedrich Hegel


Philosophers with no (significant) surviving works:

Socrates
Epicurus
Pythagoras
Thales


What do you guys think the Top 10 should look like? I'm thinking Socrates or Aristotle at #1 (Socrates if we accept no-works guys) and Nietzsche at #2.

If you're going to do this, I think you have to make it just philosophers in the western tradition. How do you even start comparing Kant and Confucius?


Notable omissions from your list (no order)
Martin Heidegger
Ludwig Wittgenstein
John Dewey
William James
John Rawls
Christine Korsgaard
John McDowell
Richard Rorty
Pyrrho (no surviving works)
Heraclitus
Parmenides
Charles Sander Pierce
Daniel Dennett
Donald Davidson
Wilfrid Sellars
Thomas Kuhn
Michel Foucault
Paul Feyerabend
Imre Lakatos
Willard von Orman Quine
Thomas Nagel
Gottlob Frege
John Searle
Peter Singer
Karl Popper
Blaise Pascal



Potential top 10 (very rough, just to get started):
1. Socrates
2. Aristotle
3. Immanuel Kant
4. Plato
5. Friedrich Nietzsche
6. Bertrand Russell
7. Thomas Aquinas
8. John Rawls
9. Georg Friedrich Hegel
10. John Locke/David Hume/St. Augustine/Karl Marx*/Ralph Waldo Emerson/John Stuart Mill

*not sure how much his contribution is specifically philosophical (in terms of overall importance he's probably easily top 10)

Yeah I wasn't sure. I could take the Eastern guys off, but the Arabs have to stay because they were VERY influential on the development of rationalism.

I didn't omit anyone intentionally, but I'm shocked I overlooked Pascal and Foucault. All the rest will be added as well.

The reason I thought Nietzsche should be at 2 is because he's probably the most influential philosopher on modern thought because he was one of the first Western philosophers to completely cut out Christianity from what defines morality. At 10 I'd probably put St. Augustine because of his influence on Christian philosophy.

Plato and Aristotle are effectively the foundation of western thought, including (albeit via proxy) huge contributions to the development of Christianity, which is still dominant over atheism. Nietzsche is a huge figure, but there's no way he's above those two.

As far as cutting out Christianity from morality, David Hume did that, and so did Immanuel Kant (though to a lesser extent), by relegating metaphysical claims (such as God's existence) to the unknowable noumenal realm. Kant especially is more important than Nietzsche. His philosophy is the foundation for Rawls' political philosophy (by far the most important political philosophy of the past century), one of the two main trends in ethics until the recent resurgence of virtue ethics (which often draws on Kant anyway, just mixed up with modernized Aristotle—see Korsgaard and McDowell), and he laid the groundwork for thinkers like Hegel and Kierkegaard. I like Nietzsche more, but I think Kant takes historical impact and influence on modern thought, and ultimately probably initial impact as well for the waves he made in resolving the debates between the empiricists and the rationalists.

Also, I think there's an argument for putting Kant, Aristotle, and Plato above Socrates since their actual contributions to the history of thought still influence us (in many cases directly), whereas we don't know what Socrates really thought. Not saying it needs to be done, but it's worth considering. (It might be simplest just to exclude those from whom no writings survive.)

I'm fine with Augustine at ten.

Would it also be possible to have recommended works beside the philosophers?

pnoom: I agree with cutting out philosophers who have no surviving works and giving them a separate mini-list. Here is what I suggest for the Top 10 then:

1. Aristotle
2. Plato
3. Immanuel Kant
4. Friedrich Nietzsche
5. Thomas Aquinas
6. David Hume
7. René Descartes
8. Søren Kierkegaard
9. Noam Chomsky
10. St. Augustine


I'm also not entirely sure about Rawls being Top 10-worthy. I put Kierkegaard so high up because he was VERY influential, either directly or indirectly, on the development of practically every philosophy after him. Also, should I replace Chomsky with Russell? Both were very influential on analytic philosophy, but I'm not sure who really deserves the spot.


Quinnsy: Absolutely! Start suggesting stuff. Some should be pretty obvious though, like Nietzsche and St. Augustine.

Well Russell simply has to be top 10. Not only was he hugely influential in a huge number of areas of philosophy, but he was also one of its primary ambassadors. Definitely above Chomsky, and I'd probably put him at #6 on the list you have. Maybe below Hume and Descartes (or between them). Kierkegaard is hugely influential in religious philosophy and existentialism, but existentialism has fallen out of favor of late. Not sure about how influential Kierkegaard still is in religious philosophy, but I assume it's a lot. I think Russell's breadth puts him above Kierkegaard, though.

I can see Rawls not being top 10, but he shouldn't be far out since he is the political philosopher of the 20th century. Wittgenstein also is commonly considered the best or one of the best 20th century philosohers, so he shouldn't be too far out of the top 10.


Some other omissions I've thought of:

A.J. Ayer
Rudolf Carnap

I'd edit all the suggestions into the first post just so they're all in one place.

I know that Russell was a great ambassador, but where exactly was he influential as a philosopher? Putting him in the Top 10 based on his role as a spokesman would be like putting Carl Sagan in the Top 10 of a Greatest Physicists list. If he is that influential though, I'd replace Chomsky with him.

Is he really that much more influential than Kierkegaard, who influenced practically every philosopher after him in some way? Yes, existentialism isn't in nearly as much favor as it used to be, but it still appears in some postmodern and surreal works and quite a bit of people still have that kind of a philosophy.

What would your revised, Top 10-20 look like?

Existentialism is a huge theme in film. Should influence outside of philosopy be taken into account?

Russell's influence in philosophy of mathematics is staggering (think of the Principia Mathematica). He is still routinely cited in arguments by atheists (see Russell's teapot, for one). His work in philosophy of language provided a jumping off point for the early Wittgenstein, and also the logical positivists. He was a staunch defender of the correspondence theory of truth (against various others, such as pragmatists like Dewey). He was a key figure in counter-acting Kantian epistemology.

Many of Russell's arguments and positions have largely been superseded, but were essential in getting philosophy to where it is now. It's not just that he's the field's greatest ambassador—he is that and one of its greatest practitioners.

And, while Kierkegaard is hugely influential in philosophy of religion, existentialism, and many strains of "continental" philosophy, his influence on "analytic" philosophy is much smaller. What does he have to say to a Dennett or a Searle? He is certainly tremendously influential and a reasonable top ten candidate, but to say he's influenced "almost every" subsequent philosopher is stretching it. I think Russell's influence in more analytic philosophy is comparable to Kierkegaard's in continental (these distinctions are crude, but reasonably useful for my purposes, I think), and probably greater simply because Russell's breadth is far greater than Kierkegaard's.


Here's a revised, but still very rough top 10.

1. Aristotle
2. Plato
3. Immanuel Kant (I could see him at either 2 or 3, really)
4. Friedrich Nietzsche
5. Thomas Aquinas
6. David Hume
7. Rene Descartes (he could move down slightly simply because basically none of his arguments are accepted anymore, even though he deserves a high spot for marking the start of modern philosophy)
8. Bertrand Russell
9. Soren Kierkegaard
10. St. Augustine

No order yet, but some I think could potentially be in the top 20 (questionable ones marked with ???):

Georg Hegel (potentially top 10, I might move him in instead of Descartes)
Ludwig Wittgenstein (at the forefront of two of the major trends in 20th century philosophy, definitely high up)
John Dewey (??? - probably near the bottom of the top 20 if in at all)
Martin Heidegger (??? - same as Dewey)
John Rawls (definitely a top 20 inclusion)
Thomas Kuhn (probably low top 20, but he should probably be the highest philosopher of science)
Gottlob Frege (??? - I'm not too sure about precisely how important he is)
Karl Popper (??? - Definitely hugely influential, but his basic project is generally considered a failure now)
Michel Foucault (really unsure about him)
St. Anselm (??? - just not sure how big he is compared to Aquinas and Augustine)
Noam Chomsky (??? - not sure how important he is to philosophy specifically, compared to linguistics and political science, which are related subjects, of course, but not strictly philosophy)
John Locke (a top 20 lock, I think, for his influence on empiricism and his continuing huge influence on political philosophy, including the actual implementation of political philosophy in countries such as the U.S.)
John Stuart Mill (major contributions to logic and ethical philosophy, influence on American pragmatism, continuing influence to today, another top 20 lock)
Ralph Waldo Emerson (??? - more of a popular influence and impact than within academic philosophy, not sure how to weight that)
Karl Marx (??? - because his main contributions are to economics and history, as I understand it, even though many philosophers draw on him)

The new Top 10 looks good, but I wouldn't really call "philosophy of mathematics" a true philosophy in a sense, considering mathematics is more of a science than a philosophy.

For the rest, I'd definitely include Hegel, Wittengenstein, Rawls, Heidegger, Foucault, Locke, Mill, Voltaire, and Rousseau. Also who should be higher, Sartre or Camus?

Well my general opinion about the two is that Camus is a much better thinker than Sartre (and a much better writer, too, for that matter), but I can't really speak for influence and impact.

To give something rough to work with, how's this look:

11. George Friedrich Hegel
12. John Locke
13. Ludwig Wittgenstein
14. John Stuart Mill
15. John Rawls
16. Martin Heidegger
17. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
18. Michel Foucault
19. John Dewey
20. Thomas Kuhn

Obviously very rough, but it's something to work from. Anyone important I missed? Regarding Voltaire, I don't think he should be very high on the list. I'm not really sure he's made all that much of a lasting contribution toward current philosophical thought, at least not compared to the others I have up there.

i agree that muslim (and also jewish) philosophers are clearly part of the "western" tradition and belong on the list, but i'm not familiar enough with them and so couldn't contribute much in that sense.

i would try to find a spot for Spinoza in that top 20, pnoom.
it may be personal bias on my part, as i see him largely worthless, but i have a hard time accepting Rousseau so high. i know he's popular, but he was a weak philosopher, not necessarily as bad as Ayn Rand, of course, but pretty mediocre. i like Voltaire much more and he is probably as influential as Rousseau, but i feel like there's nothing really original or new he wrote.
this may also be personal bias, but i consider Schopenhauer the infinitely more interesting and great philosopher than Hegel. that said, i think they should be close to each other, and i wouldn't mind seeing Hegel even a little ahead considering historical context, but if Hegel is knocking on the top 10, then Schopenhauer should be a lock for top 20.

the russian philosophers Solovyev, Dostoyevsky, and Bakunin stick out in my mind. also speaking of religious philosophers, Grigor Narekatsi is the greatest armenian religious philosopher.

other important guys that i don't think have been mentioned yet:
Saint-Simon, Montaigne, Barkley, Montesquieu, Giordano Bruno, Duns Scotus, Plotinus, August Comte, Diderot, Schelling, Goethe, Fichte, Boethius, Swedenborg, Ockham, Santayana, Theodor Adorno, David Lewis, Williams Quine, GE Moore, and possibly Durkheim and Webern

and last but not least, what are your opinions on St.Paul as possibly the greatest western religious philosopher? if he's accepted i could see him rivaling Aristotle and Plato for title of most influential.

nietzshe called kant an "underhanded christian", i think referring to his categorical imperative.

I also don't know much about Muslim or Jewish philosophers, so I really can't comment on where they should be.

Spinoza in the top 20 is interesting. He's certainly very anachronistic, and from what I've heard about him, quite interesting, but I'm not sure how big his impact is next to other philosphers on the list. I don't know a ton about him, though. This is just a gut intuition on my part.

I don't know that much about Rousseau, and I'd be fine with him not being top 20 (perhaps replaced by Schopenhauer). As far as Schopenhauer goes, I have neither read him not Hegel, but in terms of influence I think Hegel takes a decided advantage, even though what I know about the thought of both leads me to believe that I'd agree with you about him being a much more interesting thinker than Hegel.

No opinion about St. Paul, as I'm really not all that up to speed on Christianity.


He was in a sense, and he spends much of the end of the first Critique almost backpedaling on all of his attacks on the possibility of evidence for God's existence by claiming in effect that we need to assume God to have morality. He certainly did not go all the way to atheism like Hume and Nietzsche did, but he was important in splitting morality from religion, especially since his ethics is generally more influential than Hume's or Nietzsche's.