Revision as of 22:56, 2 March 2010 editVOBO (talk | contribs)2,348 edits →Influenced: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:19, 3 March 2010 edit undoGoethean (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users40,563 edits →InfluencedNext edit → | ||
Line 150: | Line 150: | ||
There is a message in the article stating, "The policy for the article, by consensus, is to include only philosophers in this category. Please see the talk page if you have questions or wish to comment." Yet the influenced category includes several people who are obviously not philosophers (Adler, Freud, Jung, Harold Bloom and Camille Paglia) and some others who only marginally count as philosophers (Bataille and Baudrillard). Can these simply be removed, or will someone object? ] (]) 22:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC) | There is a message in the article stating, "The policy for the article, by consensus, is to include only philosophers in this category. Please see the talk page if you have questions or wish to comment." Yet the influenced category includes several people who are obviously not philosophers (Adler, Freud, Jung, Harold Bloom and Camille Paglia) and some others who only marginally count as philosophers (Bataille and Baudrillard). Can these simply be removed, or will someone object? ] (]) 22:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
:I will remove Paglia; she was not influenced by Nietzsche. I support limiting the list to figures who are mentioned in the article (or a sub-article). However, it seems ahistorical and plain dumb to pigeon-hole historical figures into contemporary departmental categories. — ] ] 00:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:19, 3 March 2010
To start a peer review, choose an appropriate topic from the list below and click on the link to create the review page.
|
Skip to table of contents |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Friedrich Nietzsche article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 |
Friedrich Nietzsche is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||
|
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
To-do list for Friedrich Nietzsche: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2014-12-01
|
CALLING: Nietzsche scholars for Collaboration
Building a new article on wikipedia and I am looking to collaborate with a Nietzsche scholar. The focus is specifically geared towards unravelling N.'s last two works: Twilight of The Idols and The Anti-Christ. I have to be extremely judicious (conservative) in my attribution of themes to Nietzsche, so I'd like to have someone more tapped into the peer-reviewed, manistream consensus of standard Nietzsche scholarship to mediate and provide guidance to the claims I am about to make. Either contact me here->
-- SKYchild 07:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC) Or by electronic mail: scott (at) infinitelogic (dot) ca THANKS!
Influenced
In the influenced section of the info box, do only other philosophers belong there? Or does anyone he influenced belong there? Because I know musican Marilyn Manson's lyrics has influenced by his philosophy. So I was wondering if only philosophers belong there. KMFDM FAN 15:19, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
- Technically, only philosophers should be there. But it is arguable that Manson is a philosopher. Zazaban (talk) 21:02, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
- Please see our previous discussions on this topic. The current policy (by consensus) for this article is that only philosophers are to be in the "Influenced" category of the infobox. Nietzsche is a major figure and has influenced the work of many well-known people, both in academia and pop culture. While Manson may be one of them, he would not meet the definition of philosopher we currently use for this article.Fixer1234 (talk) 00:45, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
- The current policy (by consensus) for this article is that only philosophers are to be in the "Influenced" category of the infobox.
- Why on earth would we limit a list of Nietzsche's influences to a single discipline? I can't think of a single valid reason to do so, and can think of many reasons why such a limitation is pointless and unworkable. For starters, Nietzsche was not a typical philosophy professor. He took pride that he had been trained as a philologist and had thereby avoided the prejudices of the philosophers. 2nd, Nietzsche is seen by some like Harold Bloom as more important as a literary figure than as a philosopher. And his influence has been at least as great on literary figures. We already have Alfred Adler and Freud listed who were psychologists, not philosophers. If we are going to go with this absurd departmental policy, maybe we should remove all of the literary figures who influenced Nietzsche. — goethean ॐ 16:35, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
I added Nikos Kazantzakis in the influenced sectionGreco22 (talk) 12:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
kazantzakis was also philosopher,read the article in wikipedia...pls dont remove it.thank youGreco22 (talk) 14:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Wagner
In order to understand N's break with Wagner, one must read N's The Case of Wagner, as well as Schopenhauer's The World as Will and Representation, Volume I, Book 4. I know that this is an extremely difficult demand to make on anyone. If, however, they are read, it will then be evident that N was rejecting the attitude that the world is an evil place that must be avoided and hated. N took this to be the Christian attitude. If these two writings are not read, then it will not be clear why N broke with Wagner.Lestrade (talk) 00:59, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Lestrade
Intimate relations and sexuality
Was Niztzsche heterosexual? Did he have any wives or any girl friends? Was he attracted to males. Did he have homosexual longings for males like Richard Wagner ? I am wondering about his sexuality. Sp0 (talk) 10:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
- Of course you are, because this is Misplaced Pages, where every notable person must be described as being an invert.Lestrade (talk) 01:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)Lestrade
Being Polish
Can this be doulbe check, becuase I been talking with alot people and none heard he claim to be polish descent before ? As you can tell i did not destory anything and one can put it back. It just alot people I ask claim they never heard of it before.(Danny Boy 17:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC))
- It is sourced; this is not based on original research, it is irrelevant if you've never heard of it. And it is generally frowned upon to delete large chucks of sourced text without any discussion. Zazaban (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Now that we know that Nobel–Prize winner Herta Müller is from a Romanian town called Nitzkydorf or Niţchidorf, we might suspect that Nietzsche's name is Romanian, not Polish or German. He looks Romanian.Lestrade (talk) 00:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC)Lestrade
Notes on citizenship, nationality and ethnicity
Nietzsche is commonly classified as a “German” philosopher by professionals and non-specialists alike. The modern unified nation-state called Germany did not yet exist at the time of his birth, but the German Confederation of states did, and Nietzsche was a citizen of one of these, Prussia – for a time. When he accepted his post at Basel, Nietzsche applied for the annulment of his Prussian citizenship. The official response confirming the revocation of his citizenship came in a document dated April 17, 1869. Thus, officially he became stateless.
Nietzsche's feelings about his national identity were clearly complex. In Ecce Homo, he writes:
Even by virtue of my descent, I am granted an eye beyond all merely local, merely nationally conditioned perspectives; it is not difficult for me to be a "good European." On the other hand, I am perhaps more German than present-day Germans, mere citizens of the German Reich, could possibly be—I, the last anti-political German. And yet my ancestors were Polish noblemen: I have many racial instincts in my body from that source—who knows? When I consider how often I am addressed as a Pole when I travel, even by Poles themselves, and how rarely I am taken for a German, it might seem that I have been merely externally sprinkled with what is German.
A later revision of the same passage was discovered in 1969 among the papers of Peter Gast. In it Nietzsche is even more adamant about his Polish Identity. “I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood.” On yet another occasion Nietzsche stated “Germany is a great nation only because its people have so much Polish blood in their veins... I am proud of my Polish descent.”
A later revision of the same passage was discovered in 1969 among the papers of Peter Gast. In it Nietzsche is even more adamant about his Polish Identity. “I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood.” On yet another occasion Nietzsche stated “Germany is a great nation only because its people have so much Polish blood in their veins... I am proud of my Polish descent.”
I have to clear up this misunderstanding: Nietzsche had no Polish ancestors. I've found an article (unfortunately in Hungarian) where contemporary philosophers talk about his fictive ancestors whom he created for himself. I'll try to find an English article.
- Let me chum the shark-infested waters here and suggest that it would be possible to refer to Nietzsche as a Prussian philosopher. :-) AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- But seriously, folks, why not just call him a European? He renounced his Prussian citizenship and went off to live in Italy and Switzerland as a stateless person. Yet he also called himself Polish. So, why not just call him European? AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- We hashed this out in archives 10, 11, 12, and 15 (links below). RJC Contribs 20:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you contact me somehow user RJC? Thanks -> --Skychildandsonofthesun (talk) 05:24, 28 November 2009 (UTC) (new-ish to wiki-editing so not sure how to contact you, thanks)
Atheism
I have read in several articles that F.N. was "never actually an atheist", but just a rejectionist of theology and religion. Perhaps we need to find some sources that back it up and not categorize him under atheists but rather as agnostic? pictureuploader (talk) 03:38, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- Do you mean sources that call him an atheist or places in his writings that make it unmistakeably clear that he was an atheist? E.g., Ecce Homo II 1, where he claims that atheism is a matter of course for him, an instinct. WP:UNDUE militates against including every point of view in cases of fringe or incompetent theories. I think that an entire peer-reviewed article devoted to nothing other than the claim that Nietzsche was not an atheist that was in turn discussed in other peer reviewed articles would be necessary in this case—passing remarks or articles that are ignored won't do. RJC Contribs 14:12, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "where he claims" - RS makes it clear that first hand accounts are not to be treated as a reliable source or "truth" on the matter. Furthermore, his use of atheist is quite different from our modern use. There are many works that say he created his own new religion based on the removal of polar attributes. Until the early 20th century, atheist was simply used to describe someone against the -dominant- religion. Now it is used to describe someone against -all- religion. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- WP:RS has no problem using primary sources as evidence for a their author's opinion. WP:RS#Statements of opinion. RJC Contribs 17:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "Primary sources, on the other hand, are often difficult to use appropriately. While they can be reliable in many situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research." Saying that it is the author's opinion and saying that atheism in his use (which isn't even his word) is equivalent to modern use would be original research. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "I do not by any means know atheism as a result; even less as an event: it is a matter of course with me, from instinct. I am too inquisitive, too questionable, too exuberant to stand for any gross answer. God is a gross answer, an indelicacy against us thinkers—at bottom merely a gross prohibition for us: you shall not think!" (EC II 1). "Perhpas I am even envious of Stendhal? He took away from me the best atheistical joke that precisely I might have made: 'God's only excuse is that he does not exist.' I myself have said somewhere: what has been the greatest objection to existence so far? God." (EC II 3). "It was atheism that led me to Schopenhauer" (EC "Untimely Ones" 2). In BGE 53, he asks "Why atheism today." Atheism was Nietzsche's word. In any event, this is all very academic. Where are the peer-reviewed pieces that argue that Nietzsche was not an atheist? And has anyone taken them seriously? RJC Contribs 18:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- You do realize that it was translated from German, right? And that the above are not his actual words but a translator's interpretation? Seriously, if you can't even get that right then you shouldn't make arguments about reliability. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- You can't be serious. "Ich kenne den Atheismus durchaus nicht als Ergebniss, noch weniger als Ereigniss: er versteht sich bei mir aus Instinkt." "Er hat mir den besten Atheisten-Witz weggenommen." "Der Atheismus war das, was mich zu Schopenhauer führte." Excuse me if I don't entertain your questions anymore. RJC Contribs 18:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- RJC, I already pointed out that the word meant very different things. Furthermore, the only one trolling here is yourself, since you are trying to promote a claim that goes against our guidelines and doesn't even mean anything. Before you call people a troll, recognize that I have written far more articles and proven myself as a contributor here than you ever have. You claimed that the book was a reliable source. No, that was wrong. It was a translation. Then you claim that the primary source can be treated as fact. No, it cannot. Furthermore, it is original research to claim that our use of a term is the same as the use of a term by a German 100 years ago. That is utterly absurd and ridiculous, especially with the use of "atheist" changing during the 20th century. I already explained that the term back then merely meant to be against the organized religions. It does not have the connotation of not having any theological system. Nietzche most surely did, which anyone reading any of his works would see, especially with what values he had dominating. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- OED - from 17th to 19th century, athiest had the connotation of "impious". It also had a connotation of someone who just doesn't practice their moral obligations towards God. Neither mean that they are not religious or were unwilling to come up with a theological structure. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:49, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- So if an atheist did not mean one who believes there is no God, then what word would have been used? Or did everyone believe in God before the 20th century? 76.93.149.242 (talk) 18:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Most intellectuals, including those like Darwin, believed that Aristotle was correct in Physics and Metaphysics about the necessity of a prime mover. This view could be a pantheistic view, a deistic view, a traditional theological view, or anything really. Nietzsche was quite accepting of Aristotle and believed that traditional religions were constructs that added far more than was logically acceptable to the Aristotelian base. Instead, Nietzsche promoted the stripping away of it in order to unlock human potential once humanity no longer had restrictions or guilt. In essence, he practiced a religion of ultimate humanism, in which creation centered around humanity and human potential. Humanity as a whole replaces traditional divinity. This is definitely not something that can be described in the modern sense of "atheism". Anti-theistic? Perhaps. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- So if an atheist did not mean one who believes there is no God, then what word would have been used? Or did everyone believe in God before the 20th century? 76.93.149.242 (talk) 18:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- You can't be serious. "Ich kenne den Atheismus durchaus nicht als Ergebniss, noch weniger als Ereigniss: er versteht sich bei mir aus Instinkt." "Er hat mir den besten Atheisten-Witz weggenommen." "Der Atheismus war das, was mich zu Schopenhauer führte." Excuse me if I don't entertain your questions anymore. RJC Contribs 18:27, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- You do realize that it was translated from German, right? And that the above are not his actual words but a translator's interpretation? Seriously, if you can't even get that right then you shouldn't make arguments about reliability. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "I do not by any means know atheism as a result; even less as an event: it is a matter of course with me, from instinct. I am too inquisitive, too questionable, too exuberant to stand for any gross answer. God is a gross answer, an indelicacy against us thinkers—at bottom merely a gross prohibition for us: you shall not think!" (EC II 1). "Perhpas I am even envious of Stendhal? He took away from me the best atheistical joke that precisely I might have made: 'God's only excuse is that he does not exist.' I myself have said somewhere: what has been the greatest objection to existence so far? God." (EC II 3). "It was atheism that led me to Schopenhauer" (EC "Untimely Ones" 2). In BGE 53, he asks "Why atheism today." Atheism was Nietzsche's word. In any event, this is all very academic. Where are the peer-reviewed pieces that argue that Nietzsche was not an atheist? And has anyone taken them seriously? RJC Contribs 18:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "Primary sources, on the other hand, are often difficult to use appropriately. While they can be reliable in many situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research." Saying that it is the author's opinion and saying that atheism in his use (which isn't even his word) is equivalent to modern use would be original research. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- WP:RS has no problem using primary sources as evidence for a their author's opinion. WP:RS#Statements of opinion. RJC Contribs 17:02, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
- "where he claims" - RS makes it clear that first hand accounts are not to be treated as a reliable source or "truth" on the matter. Furthermore, his use of atheist is quite different from our modern use. There are many works that say he created his own new religion based on the removal of polar attributes. Until the early 20th century, atheist was simply used to describe someone against the -dominant- religion. Now it is used to describe someone against -all- religion. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Can we say that Nietzsche was a German philosopher?
If Nietzsche was born before the unification of Germany and the foundation of the modern german state can we say that Nietzsche was a german philosopher withour incurring in some form or anachronism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robskin (talk • contribs) 16:59, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- I don't think there's really a problem of anachronism here - the German nationality existed long before the German state, and in describing Nietzsche as "German," we're describing his nationality.VoluntarySlave (talk) 08:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
- We've also had this discussion before, check archives 10, 11, 12, and 15. RJC Contribs 18:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Another book review
I added a book over at the reference section and here is a review if anyone is interested (to validate whether the book can be potentially useful to expand upon the article etc.). . Cheers!Calaka (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
- Although I should point out and stress this point that I am in no way trying to push a POV or anything of that sort (I only realized that the review I got the book from is from A Christian Review - whereas when I first read it I only went as far as "Books and Culture"). Either way I hope there are Nietzsche experts here that can tell whether that book is good or not etc and do with it as you please. I just thought of being bold and adding it in the refs but again, if no good, do as you seem suitable.Calaka (talk) 10:28, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Name Audio
Can someone please supply Nietzsche's wiki page with an audio aid which corretly pronounces his name. A lot of people in America pronounce it like 'nee chee' but others say it is more correct to pronounce it as 'neech-eh' . This would help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.104.208 (talk) 09:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hey budd, the name is Polish so it is pronounced like a lot of Slavic names and words. 'nee-scha'. Hope that helps. Teetotaler 21 December, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.81.197 (talk) 01:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
IPA for this name
I have never heard the pronunciation in German. I corrected the IPA to . Do others agree?CecilWard (talk) 18:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
Introduction
Existentialism and postmodernism are mentioned as fields heavily influenced by Nietzsche, and I wonder if not nihilism should be mentioned there, as well; Nietzsche's connection with nihilism is more widely known than with postmodernism, for example. Revan ltrl (talk) 20:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
IPA again
The pronounciation is given as Template:IPA-de. A change was reverted, because tsch is spoken as (Template:IPA-de. That is correct and that is why I pointed out his name is Nietzsche, not Nietsche. The correct version is Template:IPA-de. -- Zz (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- The other Misplaced Pages language projects that I checked seem to have tʃ as well (unfortunately, the German article doesn't say). I'm not sure I have ever heard it pronounced differently, although the presence of an s sound before an sh would certainly be too subtle for me to discern (non-native speaker). Is it the presence of the z in the spelling that is at issue, or are you a native German speaker? RJC Contribs 16:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
- I am a native speaker. Granted, most Germans do not care either, but tsʃ is the correct version. The IPA here used to be wrong on another sound, too, and I am afraid it got copied into articles in other languages. -- Zz (talk) 16:14, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Influenced
There is a message in the article stating, "The policy for the article, by consensus, is to include only philosophers in this category. Please see the talk page if you have questions or wish to comment." Yet the influenced category includes several people who are obviously not philosophers (Adler, Freud, Jung, Harold Bloom and Camille Paglia) and some others who only marginally count as philosophers (Bataille and Baudrillard). Can these simply be removed, or will someone object? UserVOBO (talk) 22:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
- I will remove Paglia; she was not influenced by Nietzsche. I support limiting the list to figures who are mentioned in the article (or a sub-article). However, it seems ahistorical and plain dumb to pigeon-hole historical figures into contemporary departmental categories. — goethean ॐ 00:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
- General commentators and Nietzsche scholars, whether emphasizing his cultural background or his language, overwhelmingly label Nietzsche as a "German philosopher". For example: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; Source: Nietzsche: A Very Short Introduction (See Preview on Amazon); Britannica; The Cambridge Companion to Nietzsche, page 1. Others do not assign him a nationalist category. For example: Edward Craid (editor): The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of philosophy. Abingdon: Routledge, 2005, pages 726-741; Simon Blackburn: The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, pages 252-253; Jonathan Rée and J. O. Urmson, ed. (2005) . The Concise encyclopedia of western philosophy (3rd edition ed.). London: Routledge. pp. 267–270. ISBN 0-415-32924-8.
{{cite book}}
:|edition=
has extra text (help) - Er beantragte also bei der preussischen Behörde seine Expatrierung "He accordingly applied to the Prussian authorities for expatrification". Curt Paul Janz: Friedrich Nietzsche: Biographie volume 1. Munich: Carl Hanser, 1978, page 263.
- German text available as Entlassungsurkunde für den Professor Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche aus Naumburg in Giorgio Colli and Mazzino Montinari: Nietzsche Briefwechsel: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. Part I, Volume 4. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993. ISBN 3 11 012277 4, page 566.
- Friedrich Nietzsche, Ecco Homo, Why I Am So Wise, 3 (trans. by W. Kaufmann)
- Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. Ecce Homo: How One Becomes what One is. Translated by R. J. Hollingdale, Micheal Tanner. (New York: Penguin Classics, 1992), 106.
- Some recently translations use this latter text. See: Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. The Anti-Christ, Ecce Homo, Twilight of the Idols, and Other Writings: And Other Writings. Translated by Judith Norman, Aaron Ridley. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 77.
- Henry Louis Mencken, "The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche", T. Fisher Unwin, 1908, reprinted by University of Michigan 2006, pg. 6,
- Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. Ecce Homo: How One Becomes what One is. Translated by R. J. Hollingdale, Micheal Tanner. (New York: Penguin Classics, 1992), 106.
- Some recently translations use this latter text. See: Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm. The Anti-Christ, Ecce Homo, Twilight of the Idols, and Other Writings: And Other Writings. Translated by Judith Norman, Aaron Ridley. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 77.
- Henry Louis Mencken, "The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche", T. Fisher Unwin, 1908, reprinted by University of Michigan 2006, pg. 6,
- Peer review requests not opened
- Requests for peer review
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class biography articles
- B-Class biography (core) articles
- Core biography articles
- Top-importance biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- B-Class Philosophy articles
- High-importance Philosophy articles
- B-Class philosopher articles
- High-importance philosopher articles
- Philosophers task force articles
- B-Class Aesthetics articles
- High-importance Aesthetics articles
- Aesthetics task force articles
- B-Class metaphysics articles
- High-importance metaphysics articles
- Metaphysics task force articles
- B-Class ethics articles
- High-importance ethics articles
- Ethics task force articles
- B-Class social and political philosophy articles
- High-importance social and political philosophy articles
- Social and political philosophy task force articles
- B-Class Continental philosophy articles
- High-importance Continental philosophy articles
- Continental philosophy task force articles
- B-Class Modern philosophy articles
- High-importance Modern philosophy articles
- Modern philosophy task force articles
- B-Class Germany articles
- Top-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- B-Class former country articles
- WikiProject Former countries articles
- B-Class Zoroastrianism articles
- Low-importance Zoroastrianism articles
- WikiProject Zoroastrianism articles
- B-Class Atheism articles
- Top-importance Atheism articles
- Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists