What is Fame? | Philosophy Tube

What does it mean to be a famous celebrity? Is fame about knowledge, success, money, or ambition? What can we learn about fame from legends like Che Guevara and Jesus, or philosophers like Schopenhauer? Does capitalism shape fame in the modern age?

Twitter: @PhilosophyTube

Recommended Reading:
Katherine Hawley, “Success and Knowledge-How,” in American Philosophical Quarterly
Boethius, The Consolations of Philosophy
Schopenhauer, Parerga & Paralipomena

If you or your organisation would like to financially support Philosophy Tube in distributing philosophical knowledge to those who might not otherwise have access to it in exchange for credits on the show, please get in touch!

Any copyrighted material should fall under fair use for educational purposes or commentary, but if you are a copyright holder and believe your material has been used unfairly please get in touch with us and we will be happy to discuss it.

[hankoconnell]

I think if you included the recognition of one's name as well as one's image, then recognition works well a criteria for fame.

[Mari]

"I don't know how to Owen Wilson"
Simple just say WOW for every word of your life

[TreeHairedGingerAle]

I still hope that Serena Williams is Banksy.

[SupachargedGaming]

"Anonymous fame" is an interesting idea. Authors who use pseudonyms, their works are well known, but if they strolled around town, they wouldn't be recognized. Online gaming is an easier example. Having people you don't know contact you or think they know you because of your position within the community, but when you leave the community... you lose that fame.

[RoseOnFire]

This comment section is basically a classroom discussion, I love it.

[Shakespeare]

my favorite part in Infinite Jest talks about fame, how the reason we want to be famous because we look at famous folks and envy them and assume that there is some reciprocal feeling on the receiving side of envy, that as much as envy can be a fairly unpleasant feeling, the feeling of being envied must be nice in equal and opposite measure. this is what Wallace thinks is sort of the ultimate lie of fame

[celinak]

5:50 now, the thing is I do recognise the _name_ and based on how attached fans can be to a pseudonym, there is certain things we expect to recognise with famous stuff, like for example a name in and of itself.
Or a drawing style? idk where I was going with this. Isn't it enough that the name is famous.

[Nkanyiso_K]

I've always wanted to do a lot of creative things to be a modern day Renaissance man from Painting to Stand up, from making music to being a writer-director. *I've seemingly always had these ambitions* but never wanted the expectations, the Fame. I've never wanted to be a big fish in a small pond, I can see myself moving further from home, getting more industry friends but I want my work to speak for itself. I'd rather not be a name on a billboard because people have expectations & I don't think the expectations and reality could ever meet because it's like trying to know an actor judging by the Roles they play

[vinicius]

What about famous images, famous songs, famous ideas? We don't expect a painting to do anything rather then being a painting, how does it get famous then?

[willbrand]

Everyone knows that fame is defined by the existence a Wikipedia page about you. Der! ;P

[mrnobody]

In your point about recognition, you focus on being able to visually recognize. I see your point, but I feel like it leaves out all other avenues of recognition.

I would not know Orson Welles by face, but I would definitely recognize him when I hear his voice. I would say that he is famous.

Alternatively, there are people who are famous for whom I would hold no expectation, while their name I would still recognize.

Within that segment, you list names of people with fame. I have to admit that I doubt I would recognize any of them on the street, and for at least a few, I do not know what expectations I would have for them. but I would say that I still recognize their names.

Or maybe, does this imply different criteria for acquiring fame and for keeping it?

[longsun_zhao]

Maybe we could think of "becoming famous" as a process by which a "icon" or "character" is created in the minds of a group, based on the actions and appearance of a real person. This widespread cognition can have the traits of the real person but isn't bound by the truth of that person it's based on. I think this model gives us enough flexibility to cover the way we talk about fame.

[Pfhorrest]

I think you dismiss knowledge-of way too quickly, or else mean something different from it than I usually do. If someone asked me if I know Kevin Bacon, I might say " I don't KNOW him, but I know OF him", meaning I am aware of his existence, I know that "Kevin Bacon is a thing" as people say, even if I may not know much ABOUT Kevin Bacon and haven't met him personally. That seems precisely what fame is about; many people know of famous things, they've heard of them, they're aware of their existence, or at least their nominal existence; fictional characters can still be famous, inasmuch as the untrue accounts of those characters are widely known-of, which solves the problem with Jesus as much as it solves the problem with, say, Darth Vader. Darth Vader is famous, many people know of him, in that they've heard of him and are aware that he "exists", as a fictional character ("...in those Star Trek movies or whatever I think?"), even if they know almost nothing about (the stories about) him.

[IntegralDeLinha]

Very interesting video!
It raises an also interesting equivalence. Whenever you substitute truth for plausibility, 'knowledge that' becomes fame.
If you have a justified plausible belief about something, you're actually giving this something a specific fame.
Because knowledge becomes expectation when truth is replaced with plausibility.

[Frownlandia]

Fantastic line reads on Schopenhauer and Boethius. You really capture the... contemptuousness? Of their positions.

[CompilerHack]

the definition of the word fame as expectation makes it applicable to most contexts in which it ends up being used. But it does not justify the popular connotation of the word fame as something desirable. And to justify that, I believe appreciative recognition is a fair enough definition of the word fame.

[matthewgiallourakis]

My interpretation of fame actually stems from one of your video series way back about names. I would consider George Orwell to be famous, but not Eric Blair. Additionally I would consider "Santa Claus" to be famous despite not being a real person. I consider "fame" to be the creation of a cultural identity that is separate from one's own personal identity, and the extent of that fame is how well that cultural identity is recognised.

[michaelberg]

On the 'expectations' point. (7:45 - 8:12)
A nice example:
The MSc degree of Rowan Atkinson was something i knew about, just not which one it was.
I expected it was Electrical Engineering, based solely on the fact it showed up in your list of examples (before the reveal, that was 'a true example')

[AlanKlughammer]

I like your idea of expectation. It also explains infamy, or the opposite (in some sense) of fame. i.e., Hitler was famous, and infamous, because he acted in a much different sense than we expect a leader to act.

Going further on that path, though, is someone/thing famous because of expectations, or are there expectations because of the fame?

[suntzupup]

I've never considered the word "expectation" to be used yup define fame but it really works.