Talk:A. C. Grayling

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socrates This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.
Maintenance An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

Contents

[edit] Philosophical work section

The philosophical work section needs to chopped up. Just looking at that massive wall of text is daunting. I think we should considering shortening the lead paragraph and possibly making subsections. If we can do that, I think this can be higher than a B grade article in Wikiproject:Philosophy. Hazillow (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A few wiki links

Hi, I was just reading through this article and thought I'd add a few links to things such as Royal Scoiety of Arts, etc.--Frank Carmody 16:13, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Photo

Don't we have a more up-to-date photo of the man? He's pretty young in the current one. Keithmahoney 00:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I was taught by Grayling last year and it is true the picture used is old. However, his book on Descartes published late last year includes this very photo on the dust jacket. Moriarty73 19:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article ranking

This article is currently ranked of low importance. I propose this be raised to mid importance. Grayling is one of Britain's leading philosophers, and certainly the most well-known. 86.27.59.185 (talk) 11:42, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The description for "Low" is: The article is not required knowledge for a broad understanding of philosophy. Although his ideas may be important, he himself applies to the "Low" category. Hierophantasmagoria (talk) 07:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Same applies to Socrates. His ideas are important, but the man himself - he was just a man, like Grayling. There seems to be something wrong with the ranking system. If Grayling's ideas are important, and there is no separate article about his ideas, then one must come here to find out about those ideas. Consequently the article is, or perhaps might be, required knowledge for a broad understanding of philosophy, especially contemporary philosophy. I'm not saying this article should be elevated to High, but Medium is surely more appropriate than Low. 86.27.59.185 (talk) 12:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)