Is there a thinker or philosopher who wasn't also a large product of their time?

[nani]

I’m a fan of the 4th Century Bishop, Gregory of Nyssa, who made one of the earliest (if not the earliest) known unequivocal condemnations of slavery as inherently wrong.

As quoted in his Wikipedia article:

J. Kameron Carter writes about Gregory’s stance on slavery, in the book Race a Theological Account (2008):

“What interests me is the defining features of Gregory’s vision of the just society: his unequivocal stance against ‘the peculiar institution of slavery’ and his call for the manumission of all slaves. I am interested in reading Gregory as a fourth century abolitionist intellectual…His outlook surpassed not only St. Paul’s more moderate (but to be fair to Paul, in his moment, revolutionary) stance on the subject but also those of all ancient intellectuals – Pagan, Jewish and Christian - from Aristotle to Cicero and from Augustine in the Christian West to his contemporary, the golden mouthed preacher himself, John Crysotom in the East. Indeed, the world would have to wait another fifteen centuries – until the nineteenth century, late into the modern abolitionist movement – before such an unequivocal stance against slavery would appear again.”

[Stoneburg]

I’d say Jesus is the best example. He was WAY ahead of his time. Still is.

Another would be the original Buddha (Gaotama), but since he was a spoiled prince and Jesus was just the son of a carpenter, I’ll give the award to the J-man.

Leibnitz was pretty cool too, but not quite on the same level.

[Leo_Bloom]

Georg Büchner, d. 1837 Georg Büchner - Wikipedia

His plays Woychek (the basis for the libretto of 20th century classic opera Wozzeck) and Spring’s Awakening are mindboggingly discongruent with his time’s intellectual consideration of, let alone artistic encapsulation, of sexual and social “deviancy” and their wretched possibilities.

[Leo_Bloom]

@Leo_Bloom

Georg Büchner, d. 1837 Georg Büchner - Wikipedia

His play[del]s[/del] Woychek (the basis for the libretto of 20th century classic opera Wozzeck) [del]and Spring’s Awakening are[/del] mindboggingly discongruent with his time’s intellectual consideration of, let alone artistic encapsulation, of sexual and social “deviancy” and their wretched possibilities.

:smack:
Wedekind, 70 years later, is Spring’s Awakening.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

Mozi:

Mozi’s moral teachings emphasized self-reflection and authenticity rather than obedience to ritual. He observed that we often learn about the world through adversity (“Embracing Scholars” in Mozi). By reflecting on one’s own successes and failures, one attains true self-knowledge rather than mere conformity to ritual (“Refining Self” in Mozi). Mozi exhorted people to lead a life of asceticism and self-restraint, renouncing both material and spiritual extravagance.

Like Confucius, Mozi idealized the Xia Dynasty and the ancients of Chinese mythology, but he criticized the Confucian belief that modern life should be patterned on the ways of the ancients. After all, he pointed out, what we think of as “ancient” was actually innovative in its time, and thus should not be used to hinder present-day innovation (“Against Confucianism, Part 3” in the Mozi). Though Mozi did not believe that history necessarily progresses, as did Han Fei Zi, he shared the latter’s critique of fate (命, mìng). Mozi believed that people were capable of changing their circumstances and directing their own lives. They could do this by applying their senses to observing the world, judging objects and events by their causes, their functions, and their historical bases. (“Against Fate, Part 3”) This was the “three-prong method” Mozi recommended for testing the truth or falsehood of statements. His students later expanded on this to form the School of Names.