|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Vico a Neapolitan philosopher? As the most influential figure in the Italian philosophical tradition (more than Benedetto Croce, that's sure), calling him Neapolitan is a bit reductive. So Dante is a Florentine poet and Mussolini a Romagnolo politician, huh?--22.214.171.124 13:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
I love Vico, but surely Aquinas?
List of sources
Isn't there a more wikipedian standard way of doing the sources-lists? Just underlining them and putting them before the next paragraph doesn't seem to quite fit in with the rest of the site's layout... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs) 09:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
Moved from article (regarding picture)
The following was moved from the top of the article:
- [[image:|right|]] N.B.--the posted image does not seem to be of G. B. Vico. (This is the only representation I've ever seen of a bald and bearded Vico.) Cf. the copy of Francesco Solimena's portrait of Vico commissioned by Villarosa, a reproduction of which serves as frontispiece for the Fisch & Bergin translation of "The Autobiography of Giambattista Vico" (Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Pr., 1944).
The paragraph "Quotations" has been reverted because "Quotes go on Wikiquote". That's not how i imagined wikipedia : i prefer to have all informations on 1 author in 1 article. Why not. But then, the reference to wikiquote should be added (better by the one who made the revert) and all the authors' articles should be checked. Chrisdel 01:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps James Joyce deserves more of a mention here? Vico is sort of the eminence grise of Finnegans Wake: the book's cyclical pattern was inspired by Vico, and he is more or less explicitly referenced at the end of the first sentence: "brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs." - Jmabel | Talk 07:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
This is REALLY bad. It's too bad I loath this anti-scientific, reationary philosopher so damned much, or I might fix it. I wonder how the Italian version is, but I don't expect much better.--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 15:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
He may be anti-scientific and reactionary, but he's the greatest philosopher we've had, so let's be a bit more respectful... --188.8.131.52 13:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
- A philosopher whose work is mostly concerned with responding to (usually negatively) other philosophers rather than creating and developing new ideas. Most academic philosophers, in other words ;D Skomorokh 19:28, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
The infobox has been changed from a philosopher's to a writer's. Cited by the editor are that the writer's infobox is a better box, has a cleaner layout and there is space for notable works. I strongly disagree, but rather than to edit battle, I prefer to discuss it. If no discussion ensues, then I shall once again revert per WP:Preserve. The philosopher's infobox is much better, can be laid out just as cleanly as the writer's infobox, and the reason the "notable works" is not there is because there is presently an editing trend to decrease the size of infoboxes. Some wanted to add the "notable works" back in to the philosopher infobox, but consensus was to keep them out of the infobox and to mention the notable works in the article.
— .`^) Paine Ellsworthdiss`cuss (^`. 02:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Please. Just stop. Not in the first paragraph. Will you people stop claiming everyone in history "anticipated" Constructivist Epistemology? I could go into the details as to why this is completely wrong, but this just has no place in an article about Vico. If you want to put it in your CE article, different story, but what an extremely small fringe group in the academy think about Vico should not be in the first paragraph. Vico is a philosopher of history. The only notable influence that would warrant a first paragraph mention is Joyce.
If Vico "inspired" Russell as claimed, how is it that there is no mention of him whatever in Russell's "History of Western Philosophy"? Perhaps whoever made this assertion would be kind enough to provide some supporting evidence.... Godingo (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
The article ends abruptly mid-sentence
The article seems to have been cut off before its conclusion. Perhaps this is an attempt to better relate Vico to Finnegans Wake, but I rather doubt it... CCPotter (talk) 14:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)Chris Potter
apologist of classical antiquity?
I know that the meaning of the term 'apologist' here is in the sense of arguing in defence of something, but, for goodness sake, how is he defending 'classical antiquity'? Like, which bit? In Vico's writings (possibly influenced because he is from Naples, just up the road from Paestum and ancient Elea (Parmenides, Zeno etc and Calabria where Pythagoras had his school) he was focused on Demosthenes, Polybius, Seneca, Plato, Socrates, Virgil, Thucydides, Livy and several others, this wide expanse of historians, poets, philosophers, taxonomisers etc, because he was a philosopher of history and of rhetoric for the most part. Can someone explain what it means for him to be an apologist of 'classical antiquity'? Also, and I say this in response to a query above, just because Vico himself doesn't use the term 'philosophy of history' doesn't mean that his work, ideas and method didn't inspire and contribute to that field. Hugely in fact.