Cinematic Philosophy—A New Platform for Philosophy



Shamir goes back to the birth of Western philosophy, concentrating on what he calls the Socratic mistake, showing that philosophy was not born with writing and has no pure connection to it. This leads Shamir to redefine the boundaries between cinema and philosophy and call for an alternative disciplinary articulation and perspective based on a variety of media:, i.e. the recognition of the existence of oral philosophy, written philosophy, and cinematic philosophy. Shamir utilizes key features of the field of media and communications to establish that each platform provides a different kind of access to philosophy and allows for the creation of different types of philosophical works and engagements, stressing that philosophy can, should, and must be created in a variety of platforms.


Oral Tradition Western Philosophy Philosophical Thinking Unique Access Literate Society 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Books and Articles

  1. Bernstein, M. J. (1992). The fate of art. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Feyerabend, P.K., (1962). Explanation, reduction, and empiricism. In H. Feigl & G. Maxwell (eds.), Scientific explanation, space, and time (Vol. III). Minneapolis: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science.Google Scholar
  3. Feyerabend, P. K. (1981). Realism, rationalism & scientific method: Volume 1: Philosophical papers. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Flexner, J., & Thomas (1978). Steamboats come true: American inventors in action (2nd ed.). Boston: Little, Brown & Company.Google Scholar
  5. Frampton, D. (2006). Filmosophy. London, UK: Wallflower Press.Google Scholar
  6. Goody, J. (1977). The domestication of the savage mind. Cambridge: New York.Google Scholar
  7. Griswold, Charles. (2003). Plato on rhetoric and poetry. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from
  8. Harris, C. M. (1995). The improbable success of John Fitch, American inventions: A chronicle of achievements that changed the world (pp. 11–17). New York: Barnes & Noble Books.Google Scholar
  9. Hartcup, G. (1988). The war of invention Scientific developments, 191418. London: Brassey's Defense Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Innis, H. (1951). The Bias of communication. In The bias of communication (pp. 33–60). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
  11. McLuhan, M. (1964a/2006). The medium is the message. In M. G. Durham & D. M. Kellner (Eds.), Media and cultural studies: Key works (Revised ed., pp. 107–116). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Meyrowitz, J. (1994). Medium theory. In D. Crowely & D. Mitchel (Eds.), Communication theory today (pp. 50–77). Cambridge: Policity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mosier, J. (2001). Myth of the great war: How the Germans won the battles and how the Americans saved the allies. New York: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  14. Ong, J. W. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Plato. (1997). Plato’s Phaedrus. (Translated by R. Hackforth). UK, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Raudzens, G. (1990, October). War-winning weapons: The measurement of technological determinism in military history. The Journal of Military History (Society for Military History), 54(4), 403–434.Google Scholar
  17. Valenti, P. (1979/1996). Leibniz, papin and the steam engine: A case study of British sabotage of science. Printed in the American Almanac.Google Scholar

Film & Artwork

  1. Trenchard, J. (1786, December). Plan of Mr. Fitch's Steam Boat. The Columbian Magazine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. [Wood Engraving]. Retrieved from the Library of Congress:

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.New YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations