Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Criticism of philosophy

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. ✗plicit 09:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of philosophy[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article creator has repeatedly reverted attempts (by four separate editors including myself) to turn this page into a redirect, so I'm bringing it here for discussion. The article as it stands simply quotes some comments made by Stephen Hawking which don't appear to have had any lasting impact. Since the title is a plausible search term, I attempted to redirect it to Antiphilosophy; this was reverted on the grounds that "anti-philosophy is a philosophy movement within philosophy whereas this article criticizes philosophy in general".

It's true that antiphilosophy is philosophy, and that's because any coherent criticism of philosophy is philosophy. One can criticise aspects of philosophy as it is practiced, but one can't sensibly criticise philosophy as a concept. Hawking's "philosophy is dead" comment seems to have been just a provocative soundbite; in the book which he is plugging in this speech, he talks at length about the philosophical foundations of modern physics, and presents himself as continuing that tradition with his own work.

As I said, though, I don't see any evidence that Hawking's comments have been widely discussed, which is why I'm proposing a straight redirect to Antiphilosophy rather than a merge. Dan from A.P. (talk) 06:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Dan from A.P. (talk) 06:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - this page is a non-notable POVFORK because the creator couldn't get the Hawking-quote into the main philosophy article. --Mvbaron (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom, seems a fair assessment. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the topic in its widest sense might deserve an article, but the current content is just way too specific on one opinion and too limited to do justice to the topic. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As it stands this article is too short and limited to be other than trivial, one scientist's opinion. Athel cb (talk) 16:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as needless. Scientist claims that philosophy is dead, film at 11. XOR'easter (talk) 21:09, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a terrible sounding topic, just nothing notable or article-worthy on the page, based on a single statement. TeaEarlGreyVeryHot (talk) 02:12, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have to admit due to the nature of and disgreement within "philosophy" on just about everything, I find it hard to believe it is actually possible to have a coherent article on criticizing it. However we should not treat the statements of one man at one conference as the total sum and point of start on the matter.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.