Talk:Irish philosophy

Point of / justification for article

I will not nominate for deletion on the day of its creation but this article does not manifest that this is an encyclopedic topic at all. Is there really an "Irish philosophy" and if so, where are books and articles? This is so far an incoherent run-through of some people with Irish connections who held philosophical positions. It needs substantiation, or move to Draft space. SeoR (talk) 20:27, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

There are several sources cited for a start, including a History of Irish Thought and a Dictionary of Irish Philosophy. The point of the article is the same as all the other philosophies by region. Cake (talk) 21:02, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt response, and further work on the article. I remain to be convinced about "the philosophical tradition of the Irish people" as a unified topic, but I note the two broad books mentioned, and will take a read of one tomorrow. Meantime, to sustain the article, some unifying text is needed (to make the article more than a list of people). Good luck with the writing, SeoR (talk) 21:29, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes I agree. Not all the puzzle pieces are coming from the same part of the picture, and some are just in a pile, but I am hoping a picture forms. I think it is quite similar to Scottish philosophy, with how it is a part of British philosophy, but needs its own more focused article. Perhaps even more so, as Ireland (sans the North) is not in the UK, and Catholic. While some parts will be repeated in the British article, I am not so sure it should be simply absorbed into it. For example Molyneux, Thompson, and Wheeler seem more specific to Irish philosophical history. German and Austria suffer from a similar quandary. Cake (talk) 21:53, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

We have several articles on the philosophy in specific countries, such as British philosophy, American philosophy, and German philosophy. Those are topics commonly evoked in the academic literature. There are also categories of country-specific philosophy that are never evoked and would not deserve a separate article, such as philosophy of Burkina Faso or philosophy of Liechtenstein. In most cases, it is obvious whether a national philosophical tradition is sufficiently influential to warrant a standalone article. However, there are borderline cases where it is difficult to decide. I think Irish philosophy is one of them. There are some reliable sources that have this topic in their title, such as Dictionary of Irish Philosophers, Berkeley and Irish Philosophy, Enlightenment and Counter-Enlightenment in Irish Philosophy, and Divine Analogy in Eighteenth-Century Irish Philosophy, so I think the topic has enough WP:Notability. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this. Note there was also an issue of the magazine Philosophy Now dedicated to Irish philosophy. I think one reason this article is useful is Boyle. See the Stanford article and the Invisible College wikipedia entry. One should probably go over him as one does Francis Bacon or Newton. But that is probably too much "natural philosophy" for the British article. Also note we have an article for Dutch philosophy, and Scottish philosophy, yet one could argue those should be absorbed into Germany and Britain respectively. Never mind disputed territory, such as is Alsatian philosophy French or German? Fair point about Burkina Faso, etc. Though I could imagine it being made if there were some notable philosopher from there. There is an article for Finland for instance, I suspect thanks to Hintikka and von Wright. Cake (talk) 14:55, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Augustus De Morgan and Bishop Berkeley

There are websites which claim Augustus De Morgan was a Berkeleyan idealist. See here: "He admired Berkeley and followed him to the extent of holding the existence of minds to be more certain, as a fact of experience, than that of a material world.". I tried to find the source for this, and was exasperated. I even tried to get AI to assist. After several attempts, I think they are confusing Mill with De Morgan, somehow, due to De Morgan saying Berkeley's calculus criticisms were prescient. Cake (talk) 20:37, 2 August 2026 (UTC)