Talk:Bruces' Philosophers Song

Old talk
I thought is was: 'drink you under the table' It is a drinking song, after all. Bruce would agree with me. – Webhat
 * In The Fairly Incomplete and Rather Badly Illustrated Monty Python Song Book the lines are "think you under the table" and "Wilhelm Freidrich Hegel". Dunno if that helps. Acanon 01:45, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Amended lyrics. I'm almost certain it's "think you under the table".  Which makes sense as it's mixing thinking into a drinking expression in much the same way as "drink therefore I am" mixes drinking into a thinking expression.  --Plumbago 14:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Well it wouldn't be nearly as funny if it didn't say "think" where you'd expect "drink" and vice versa, now would it? J I P  | Talk 18:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Are the lyrics copyright-free?Jorge Stolfi 12:11, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * No of course not. Justinc 12:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't see any reason not to have the full lyrics of the song and have therefore reinstated them Arthur Holland
 * Because they are a copyright violation. Justinc 12:57, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

The version of the Bruces' Song on "Monty Python - Live at Drury Lane" uses "Both Schopenhauer and Hegel" as the sixth line. It also gives line 17 as "Hobbes was fond of his Dram". Of course, this was a live performance, so it may be different (like the names of the candidates on the Election Night Special) --Random Kingdom 23:30, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Since when has there been any dispute about whether it was Eric Hoffer or Thomas Hobbes the Pythons were referring to? For a start, the lyrics were published in the Monty Python Papperbok (aka Big Red Book) in the early 70s, where it was Hobbes. I find it highly unlikely that the Pythons would have heard of Hoffer in any case, never mind the fact that he wasn't really a philosopher. Is it only Americans who suffer from this confusion? Lexo 17:46, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

How do I sing the line "John Stuart Mill, of his own free will, on half a pint of shandy was particulary ill"? The bit up to "free will" goes easily along with the tune, but how does the rest fit in? Could someone show me the proper tone division? It is the only line in the entire song that I can't sing just by reading the text. J I P | Talk 17:52, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Find a copy of the Monty Python Hollywood Bowl concert and it will become clear to you. You have to run the second half of the sentence together to make it fit. Wahkeenah 17:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

@JIP: the downbeats are "half" "shan" "tic" (roughly) and "ill". They say it fast. @Lexo - "Papperbok" and "Big Red Book" are two different books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.74.57.100 (talk) 20:30, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

So which version is believed to be official?
The article states that

However, the publication of the lyrics with the release of Monty Python Sings suggests that the Hegel version is the official one.

while both versions mention Hegel. Which one is believed to be the official one, Schopenhauer and Hegel or just Hegel? Kotiwalo (talk) 07:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Considering the topic, it might've been a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 05:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Play on Nietzsche
"Ironically, Nietzsche abstained from alcohol. The double negative 'nothing' and 'couldn't' is a play on this." How is this a play on Nietzsche's abstinence? Assuming you can teach anything you know, the line implies that Nietzsche knew everything about drinking. Calling it a "double negative" makes it seem that the words are canceling each other (like "I don't want nothing" = "I want something"). This is not a double negative in that sense. Now if it was written "There wasn't nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach you..." instead, then I might see the play, but I'm just missing it here. Is there a source for this? 201.82.172.36 (talk) 04:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Someone misinterpreting. "There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist..." means he knew everything about it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, so that means there is no point in Nietzsche even being in that list. Because the section's intro says "Some of the philosophers are portrayed according to their works.". And last I checked trivia sections were frowned upon, so this theme should be upheld or else it just becomes a trivia section. 201.82.172.36 (talk) 16:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoever posted that misinterpreted, and taking that part away, we're just left with the ironies, which may or may not be "trivial", but they don't really have anything to do with this philosophy (unless "not drinking" was discussed in his philosophy). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist... might implied on Nietzsche's compulsive masturbation ("raising of the wrist"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.229.245.41 (talk) 19:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Possible precursor
There's an "Astronomers' Drinking Song" written ca. 1800 included in Augustus De Morgan's "Budget of Paradoxes", also included in "The World of Mathematics" by James Newman, vol 4 ISBN 0-486-41152-4. It also mentions Descartes, but insultingly (due to controversies over whether Newton or Descartes invented calculus)... AnonMoos (talk) 07:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Gosh, that does sound quite similar. And it was even before BBC Two started! Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

not encyclopedic?
I love this song and whoever put this article together, but I'm afraid that the parenthetical descriptions that follow the names in the list of philosophers aren't very encyclopedic.PurpleChez (talk) 19:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)