Talk:Peter Adamson (philosopher)

Regarding the move from (academic) to (philosopher)
I disagree with the move, because as of now he's more prominent as an academic in philosophy rather than an actual philosopher. For example, most of his fame and notability, including those covered int his article come from his books and podcasts that teach people about philosophy, or studies and research he did on the field, rather than from his own philosophy (compare, for example Kant or Nietzsche are known from their own philosophy rather than their teachings or research on the field). HaEr48 (talk) 18:50, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * On the one hand, if he is known for his books and podcasts that teach "people" about philosophy, then he is not known as an "academic" either. On the other hand, there are people like Alain de Botton which are famous for their bestsellers (for the public), but are known as philosopher. I think philosophers like Kant or Nietzsche are very high standards for the word "philosopher". I think anyone who teaches philosophy in well-known departments or writes philosophy books can be called a philosopher. Ali Pirhayati (talk) 05:44, 25 December 2018 (UTC)