Which philosopher caused the most damage in human history?

Question

All ideas aren't equal. Let's hear your opinion as to the worst philosophical guide.

Answer 1

For the love of knowledge !none. As  it is, there are just a few , handful of philosophers that can be counted.

Let me conjecture, not like stupid answers to silly qs.

Among the ancients from all over the world : none.

Middle Ages did not have many philosophers.again none.

Among the moderns : too many may vie for the spot, yet the result none.

post-moderisms has no philosopher.

So, if we r left with the whole of humanity, the result of the equation would be

a^1(early man-last  of ancients]; b^^[last of the ancients to the first modern]; c^^^[ first of the modern to the power of `n' yet to come]

The answer is not a^ or b^^ or c^^^, i.e., none of the past philosophers but, most possibly the `n', who would sound the death knell of philosophy.

but that is only possible if ant `n' pre-existed a^

assumption for damage : disappearance of all knowledge

Answer 2

I've read a few books on Western Philosophy, which also talks about Eastern Philosophy.  Of course, the big debate is the existence or nonexistence of a god or gods.  I suppose these where very wise men, but in all of their philosophizing, they never question that the god or non-god is anything but a male entity.  Did they just take this for granted?  The male god thing has caused irreparable damage, and much violence against women, who make up half the worlds population.

Please don't shoot me down, I'm a babe in the philosophy department.  Were there any noted woman philosophers in history?

Answer 3

Certainly you could include Karl Marx, Friedrich Nietzsche and Georges Sorel.

Karl Marx saw himself as a benefactor of society and was focused on making the world a better place by getting rid of the aristocrats and the upper class entirely (class warfare). I think he would have been genuinely dismayed by the Revolution in Russia; the class warfare never stopped because there was always a new class to target as the enemy.

Nietzsche was an absolutely brilliant writer who taught German prose how to dance. Since most people only read fragments of what he had written, they failed to realize that he contradicted himself a great deal, and that the disease of syphilis definitely affected his writing. He hated the Germans, for instance, but they ignored this and picked up instead on the many comments he made about lions being preferable to sheep.

Georges Sorel was an anarchist and nihilist whose only purpose in life was to promote violence and terrorism. His prose is truly frightening.

I don't mention Hitler, because he was not a philosopher, distrusted intellectuals, and didn't like to hear facts that discredited his cherished dogma of racial superiority.

Answer 4

i don't think thought even written thought  can be to blame for anything at all - its philosophers we are talking about not messaiahs -thoughts in process cant hurt anyone its only when peopel ossify them  for their own ends to justify their dicey dicky deals that there is harm.

goethe wrote a book in which someone  killed themselves for unrequited love  there was a wave of copycat suicides  was it his fault for having a story? I think not we are responsible for our own actions.

Answer 5

None.  Philosophers seldom are involved in the accumulation of power that would be necessary to do any damage.

Some people might suggest V. Lenin but he was works were amateurish and never considered important writings.  Karl Marx was virtually powerless and cannot be blamed for anything other than challenging the corrupt slave labor mentality of the form of capitalism that existed in his time.  He was beneficial in that he made capitalists realize that an inhumane society would eventually over turn capitalism if it was not humanized and had safety nets built into the economy.

Mao was a poet but not a philosopher.  His "Little Red Book" was a collection of his pithy but boring sayings.

No one with power in the n**i or Fascist movements were philosophers although a few philosophers were members of the n**i party just to survive.

This pattern pretty much covers all societies, not just those which have caused harm to societies and to civilization.

English philosophers such as Edmund Burke, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill, and others had profound effects on societies around the world that were both profound, important, and both destructive and creative.   The truth is that democracy is never established without conflict.  Democracy doesn't happen peacefully as many misguided, poorly educated people think.  

The idea that democracy happens peacefully is a common but completely untrue myth.  So it is possible to point to the English economic philosophers as sources of destruction just as easily as it is for the German and Russian philosophers.  But also in their cases, they were not the ones who imposed new paradigms upon societies.  Just depends on what side you are on when it comes to laying blame for destruction.

Answer 6

Damage?

How so?

Have we not learned from the mistakes of erred philosophies?

Answer 7

In a way it was Aristotle, because he set the first step toward nihilism. For he emancipated philosophy from politics, placing politics in the service of philosophy rather than vice versa (as with Plato). Every step away from politics, however, is a step into the unspeakable individual privacy of nihilism. The Greek word for "private person" was *idiotes*.

EDIT: I want to elaborate my answer in the form of a little reply to Yaoi. Note that the "source" mentioned below applies especially to my answer as it was before this edit.

Yaoi quotes:

"Throughout history the influence of Aristotle’s philosophy (particularly of his epistemology) has led in the direction of individual freedom, of man’s liberation from the power of the state" . . . Aristotle (via John Locke) was the philosophical father of the Constitution of the United States and thus of capitalism . . . it is Plato and Hegel, not Aristotle, who have been the philosophical ancestors of all totalitarian and welfare states, whether Bismarck’s, Lenin’s or Hitler’s."

This implies that individual freedom, capitalism, etc., are "good", whereas totalitarian and welfare states are "bad" or "evil".

I am inclined to the opposite position: that "liberalism" (laissez-faire capitalism etc.) is bad, whereas a powerful State is good.

Laissez-faire capitalism is sometimes called "libertarian": as much personal and economic freedom as possible, that is, as little state as possible. But if it was consistent, it would completely abolish the state, leading to anarchy.

"Liberalism" is the reason for the current disintegration of society. In a liberal-capitalist state, all that keeps society together are the police (internally) and the army (externally). For it lacks the ruling Idea that makes its citizens adhere to it naturally. Such an idea is for instance the idea of "America" (the United States) as a nation with a mission: "to make the world free for democracy". That spreading freedom and democracy means spreading the seed of nihilism ("liberalism") does not matter; for as long as it focuses on *spreading* this seed, it is immune to this seed: for the promotion of liberalism is not itself liberal.

The movement that has made and spread this myth is of course the Neo-Conservative movement, which has its basis in the thought of Leo Strauss. The problem, however, is that men such as Rumsfeld and Cheney -- who were also there during the Cold War, by the way! saying the same things about "the Communists" they have recently been saying about "the terrorists" -- the problem is that such men have come to actually *believe* their own myth; whereas it was meant to be only a new opiate for the people. They have taken their own opiate, in order to show others how good it was, and have consequently become addicted to it.

Nihilism is the bane of modernity. The "Enlightenment" enlightens men to the total meaninglessness of life, to their radical privacy and solitude, to the fact that the world might be a complete hallucination... If tremendous counterforces were not at work against it, if "dark" passions did not obfuscate this nihilism, then the "light" of consciousness would be extinguished by the complete disbelief in the subject (the self) and in objects (other beings) -- the presuppositions of all consciousness. But see my other answer, to the question regarding the law of identity (A=A): logic is itself such an obfuscation: the belief that reality is logical is not "true", it is itself a myth meant to make reality workable for *us* -- to make life livable for us...

Answer 8

Marx, at least that’s what Isaiah Berlin said and I can’t think of a better answer.

Yaoi: that was a stunning answer, absolutely stunning.

Answer 9

Plato lied to us about Atlantis!!!! dig em up and kill em again!!!

just kidding. probably Hitler.

his philosophy ingrained allot of racism in the world that still holds today. especially for Jews.

he turned a small nation into an enormous mound of hate. he left a stain on recent human history that will take millenniums to wash off. he had some great views and idealism's but as a whole the guy was a quacko on speed that was taken waaay too seriously.

some may say he was not a philosopher but they are dumb. they don't know anything about Hitler.

Answer 10

We can say Plato began all the damage:

"There is only one fundamental issue in philosophy: the cognitive efficacy of man’s mind. The conflict of Aristotle versus Plato is the conflict of reason versus mysticism. It was Plato who formulated most of philosophy’s basic questions—and doubts. It was Aristotle who laid the foundation for most of the answers. Thereafter, the record of their duel is the record of man’s long struggle to deny and surrender or to uphold and assert the validity of his particular mode of consciousness."

Review of J.H. Randall’s Aristotle,

The Objectivist Newsletter, May 1963

When Augustine incorporated Plato into Christianity, it led to the Dark Ages. When Aquinas incorporated Aristotle into Christianity, we slowly emerged from "Plato's Cave," into the The Enlightenment. There is a reason it is called the Enlightenment--because Caves are dark.

"Throughout history the influence of Aristotle’s philosophy (particularly of his epistemology) has led in the direction of individual freedom, of man’s liberation from the power of the state . . . Aristotle (via John Locke) was the philosophical father of the Constitution of the United States and thus of capitalism . . . it is Plato and Hegel, not Aristotle, who have been the philosophical ancestors of all totalitarian and welfare states, whether Bismarck’s, Lenin’s or Hitler’s." ibid

But Kant led to Hegel.

"The man who . . . closed the door of philosophy to reason, was Immanuel Kant . . . .

"Kant’s expressly stated purpose was to save the morality of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice. He knew that it could not survive without a mystic base—and what it had to be saved from was reason.

"No, Kant did not destroy reason; he merely did as thorough a job of undercutting as anyone could ever do.

"If you trace the roots of all our current philosophies—such as pragmatism, logical positivism, and all the rest of the neo-mystics who announce happily that you cannot prove that you exist—you will find that they all grew out of Kant." Ayn Rand

And you find that Kant grew out of Plato. If you wonder what is wrong with today's world, it is because Aristotle is on the wane, and Plato is rising.

The darkness is returning.

Answer 11

Adam Smith.  His work, The Wealth of Nations, was produced while the capitalist system was expanding, in it's initial boom cycle.  From that, many many people now believe that capitalism can work and that global warfare is just an evil that occurs.  Capitalism also contracts, we get recessions, from which global warfare is the only escape.  War creates work!  Work creates profit.  Lack of profi = recession.  Recession eventually leads to global warfare.

Why can't people see this?

Answer 12

This is not an opinion.

Unreconstructed followers of philosophers have caused the most "damage" to Philosophy: Yaoi-Rand is an excellent example. With Yaoi-Rand at the wheel, the passengers get taken for the peculiar ride where History can not be overcome. Rather, I should state, the ride would take on a peculiar feeling of compulsion for a philosopher: retrogression.

Your worst [historical] guide is Yaoi-Rand. That is auspicious for History. Auspicious for Philosophy is what both Yaoi-Rand and the stooge "Glenn Harvey Fingler" conceive to be damage [sic.] !

Addendum- Comment on Fingler's Additional Details. The notion that the whole of human History may be grasped by a human is questionable. The actions of philosophers' unsolicited followers, however, are there for all educated people to examine. Now, what is History?

Answer 13

I think Arthur Schopenhauer trashed his hotel room once.

If you are talking about their ideas, I think all ideas are worthy of contemplating and verifying or debunking, so in the sense that we learn something from all ideas tested, I, personally would rephrase it, " Which philosopher have we learned the most from in human history"

Answer 14

there is no, good or bad philosophers,  there Philosophy is just a hypothetical answer to a problem, or question ...the good or bad that comes from it, is what you get out of the answer and what you do with it ..........

Answer 15

Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's Propaganda Minister and the real brains behind the Third Reich is hard to beat on this one.  He refined with utter brutality earlier philosophies such as "Laisse' Majeste' " and "Manifest Destiny" into 'The Master Race' and 'The Final Solution' -- and codified ideas whose persistence continues to infect the world and which have seen a recent renewal of popularity among powerful elements of our own society. The elemental difference which distinguishes Goebbels plans from earlier philosophers is the actual implementation of elitist ideas into action; especially segregation, imprisonment, and murder to further the "Betterment of Society", while applying no adherence to a divine calling except his own inspiration.  He even wrote, "Anti-Semitism is the only pornography tolerated under the Third Reich."   Thus, rather than declaring himself a prophet --  he declared himself (and by proxy his followers) to be above any conventional concepts of 'Right' and 'Wrong'.   As for the new-fangled version, which hedges its bets by returning to "Obeying God's Will" as the motive, see the terrifying (and fully documented) book cited below.

(Dis)honorable mention to acolytes Pol Pot, B.F. Skinner, and Karl Rove.

Answer 16

I would say William Henry Huxley who, apparently, according to a British documentary I saw on youtube, was the driving force behind social darwinism or a driving force.  All racist ideas which live on to present time and now, ultimately began with him.  Also Huxley could be credited as the father of the American High School.