Michael Foley at the moment, I dont like a lot of the other popular contemporary philosophers like AC Grayling, Alain de Botan (spelling) and I dont like the atheistic new wave, a lot of what they write does not seem like philosophy at all, there's nothing of the sincere doubts or self scrutiny which exist with other philosophers.
I like Foley because he questions a lot of contemporary or emerging norms and mores without necessarily choosing to treat those which are alternatives as sacrosanct automatically. I dont like a lot of the philosophers which tend to be popular with others, especially Neitzsche, because perhaps in the past their critic was valid but it has in many ways become normative or part of the culture without being recognised as such and then new readers discover it for the first time and believe it has the same validity or relevence as it once did and apply it as though there has been no change or development in between times.
I like Foley because he questions a lot of contemporary or emerging norms and mores without necessarily choosing to treat those which are alternatives as sacrosanct automatically. I dont like a lot of the philosophers which tend to be popular with others, especially Neitzsche, because perhaps in the past their critic was valid but it has in many ways become normative or part of the culture without being recognised as such and then new readers discover it for the first time and believe it has the same validity or relevence as it once did and apply it as though there has been no change or development in between times.