Philosophy fantasy league

We have football fantasy league and
baseball, hockey, basketball and even a bowling
fantasy league, but we don’t have a philosophy
fantasy league. So I would pick in my
philosophy fantasy league, Socrates,
followed by Hume. Socrates can play both
offense and defense, and he seems to be able
to score at will. Hume’s strength is defensive.
The strength of his position is undeniable.

Kant’s position looks really strong, but it falls
apart easily, so I wouldn’t pick him.

So who would you pick on your philosophy
fantasy league?

Kropotkin

that depends on the object of the game…

if it is to woo chicks, definitely not nietzsche…

if it is to corrupt humanity, any number of religious types (including statists) will do fine…

-Imp

“Impenitent”]that depends on the object of the game…

“if it is to woo chicks, definitely not Nietzsche…
if it is to corrupt humanity, any number of religious types (including statists) will do fine”…

Religious types as those who believe in capitalism?

As with any game, its the players who decide what the
rules are. My rules are, think about the arguments
one philosopher might put up against another. Could
Kant defend against Hume? I doubt it.
That would be my rules.

Kropotkin

Read Umberto Eco’s book on a footballing philosophers team. It’ll answer all your questions.

Philosphy just cannot have a league, not for any object.

Nietzsche woos the chicks the best, as he whips them the hardest.

Regarding who corrupt humanity the most, agreed.