Introduction: Philosophy’s Changing Face in the Social Media Era

The digital age has fundamentally transformed how we engage with ideas, knowledge, and intellectual authority. Today, the lines between public intellectuals, academic philosophers, and online influencers are sometimes blurred. A click on YouTube will pull up charismatic individuals dissecting age-old paradoxes; a scroll through Twitter may present succinct—sometimes viral—take-downs of metaphysics or pithy ethical aphorisms. With this shift, a provocative question emerges: Are modern philosophers really just influencers with footnotes?

While this question is tongue-in-cheek, it invites us to rethink: What distinguishes philosophical engagement from the influencer’s toolkit? And what can the overlooked history of early modern women philosophers teach us about the nature and value of philosophy—both in the past and for our digital present?

The Influencer-Philosopher Paradox: Defining Influence, Authority, and the Philosophical Voice

At first glance, today’s philosophers and social media influencers might appear worlds apart. The philosopher is imagined in scholarly isolation, wrestling with dense texts and abstract problems; the influencer, meanwhile, operates in the current of algorithms—shaping trends, setting discourses, and engaging vast audiences with persuasive storytelling.

Yet both are bound by the pursuit of influence: the imparting of ideas, the cultivation of a following, and the shaping of collective understanding. The difference, some argue, lies primarily in rigor and transparency—hence the “footnotes.” Philosophers are expected to anchor their claims in reasoned argumentation, cite sources—developing a lineage of thought with accountability to tradition and evidence. Influencers, on the other hand, are often seen as privileging style over substance, and virality over verifiability.

But how did these roles take shape? To answer this, we must look to history—and particularly, to the forgotten voices of early modern women philosophers.

Early Modern Women Philosophers: The Original Influencers of Thought

The narrative of philosophy’s development often centers on the "great men": Descartes, Locke, Kant, and their intellectual heirs. Yet, in the corridors of the 17th and 18th centuries, women thinkers—such as Margaret Cavendish, Elisabeth of Bohemia, Damaris Masham, Émilie Du Châtelet, and Mary Astell—were actively shaping debates in metaphysics, ethics, epistemology, politics, and beyond.

Importantly, these women were not merely footnoting the ideas of towering male figures; they were creating new spaces for discourse, employing innovative rhetorical strategies, and carefully curating their public personas. In an era when entry into formal academic circles was nearly impossible for women, they found creative means to disseminate their work through salons, private correspondence, and published treatises—often engaging large, transnational audiences.

“We must remember that the separation between philosopher and ‘influencer’ is a relatively recent invention. In the early modern period, women thinkers, barred from the academy, often had no choice but to cultivate public personas, network strategically, and package their ideas for broader audiences—skills that would not seem out of place on today’s digital platforms.”

Margaret Cavendish, for example, crafted a deliberate identity as the ‘Mad Madge’—a notoriety that guaranteed readership for her philosophy. Émilie Du Châtelet’s bold translations and critiques of Newton and Leibniz pulled scientific philosophy into the reach of the educated public. Mary Astell’s pamphlets, accessible yet deeply analytical, participated in broad debates on women’s education and rationality.

These women philosophers often blended intellectual rigor with accessible prose and personal branding. Their networks—comprised of letters, salons, and published replies—functioned remarkably like the social and marketing machinery of modern influencers. They were the public intellectuals of their time, their “footnotes” signifying not only dedication to argument but also tactical acknowledgment of predecessors and rivals alike.

Main Research: From Footnotes to Followers—What Do Early Modern Women Philosophers Teach Us?

To claim that “modern philosophers are just influencers with footnotes” is to overlook the rich tradition of philosophers deliberately seeking influence outside the academy—often with intentionality, wit, and ethical seriousness.

1. The Performance of Philosophy: Authority, Accessibility, and Public Engagement

The practices of early modern women philosophers illuminate philosophy as a public performance. Cavendish would stage debates as plays; Du Châtelet published scientific essays and open letters; Astell responded to critics in pamphlet wars. Their styles were as much about commanding attention as about meticulous reasoning.

In the digital age, the ability to engage publics—to translate complex ideas, anticipate objections, and present one’s thought with flair—is more relevant than ever. Far from being suspect, this blend of accessibility and authority is foundational to philosophy’s evolution and societal relevance.

2. Intellectual Networks: Salons, Correspondence, and Philosophical Virality

Before the internet, early modern women philosophers built knowledge networks through handwritten letters, informal debates, and editorship of periodicals. Their “followers” spanned European intellectual circles, and their ideas gained traction through both personal charisma and intellectual substance.

These networks reveal that virality—whether in the form of 18th-century correspondence or 21st-century retweets—has always underpinned the dissemination of philosophical ideas. Today’s digital platforms replicate and amplify systems that early women philosophers mastered without modern technology.

3. Footnotes as Ethical Practice: Citation, Dialogue, and Trust

While “footnotes” might seem like a dry academic formality, they emerge from broader traditions of dialogue, transparency, and intellectual humility. Early modern women philosophers used extensive citation as a means of both joining and expanding ongoing conversations. Citing one’s influences was not only a demonstration of learning, but a tool for building trust and ethical credibility—a far cry from empty hyperlinking or “citation as performance” among some contemporary influencers.

Recognition through citation also allowed marginalized voices to claim legitimacy. For figures like Masham and Astell, strategic referencing meant being taken seriously by male counterparts and integrating women’s voices into the canon.

Conclusion: Beyond the Influencer/Philosopher Binary—Reclaiming Women’s Philosophical Legacies

Instead of dismissing contemporary philosophers as mere influencers with footnotes, we might see the turn toward accessible public philosophy as a revival of traditions forged by early modern women thinkers. Their work demonstrates that influence, community-building, and rigorous argument need not be mutually exclusive—rather, each is essential to philosophy’s public mission.

The question—“Are modern philosophers just influencers with footnotes?”—reflects anxieties about intellectual authority in the digital age. But it also opens a space for re-examining who gets to shape philosophical discourse, and how. Early modern women philosophers remind us that who wields influence and how thought is disseminated have always been central, contested philosophical questions.

As we build a more inclusive philosophical canon, the histories and methods of early modern women thinkers offer not just lessons in academic footnoting, but models for bold, ethical, and transformative influence. In studying them, we do not simply recover lost voices; we rediscover philosophy as a living, breathing public practice—one that rightfully belongs to everyone inspired to think, critique, and change the world.

Let us take a cue from Cavendish, Du Châtelet, Astell, and their contemporaries: to influence is not antithetical to philosophy—it is its natural goal. The job of today’s public philosophers, with or without footnotes, is to ensure that the discourse remains both accessible and accountable, rigorous and resonant.