How do I get started in philosophy Veeky Forums? I have some philosophers in mind that I want to learn more about...

How do I get started in philosophy Veeky Forums? I have some philosophers in mind that I want to learn more about, but I want to get a good general overview first, and not read someone's 20 book collection right away.

Should I read essays before books, and what about criticisms?

Other urls found in this thread:

docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM
plato.stanford.edu/
plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/.
tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/k/korsgaard_2005.pdf
people.fas.harvard.edu/~korsgaar/CMK.FH.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

All you need is Schopenhauer's 'On Women' and Mein Kampf

Redpill > cuck philosophy

I was hoping to start with less specific issues first, like basic epistemology, or philosophy about language, and ethics and existentialism.

>I want to fill my head with circle jerk pseud nonsense
Waste of time, it's boring and you won't impress that pseud girl that sits a row behind you.

What are you intersted in?

docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM

Not boring to me, and I'm not trying to impress anyone. I do it to relate to people of the past on issues that have bothered me but I'm not smart enough to think deeply on them myself.

A lot of things. I like epistemology a lot. I was influenced greatly by Descartes's rationalism as I study math and it resonated with my thought process a bit.

I also think too much about the purpose/meaning of life, so I've found solace in the existentialists like Kirkegaard and Sartre, but I'm interested in learning more ideas in that area. I haven't made the leap of faith (yet) so I'm curious to see what other atheistic solutions there are to this question.

The most specific thing I can think of is how language influences our thinking. I know a little about Wittgenstein and hope to read more, but Orwell is my idol here, for 1984 and how newspeak influences society.

You start with the glorious Greeks
a) Presocratics: Diels/Kranz books for the original fragments, John Burnet's Early Greek Philosophy (it's a bit outdated but it is definitely a useful introductory read), Werner Jaeger's Paideia
b) Plato: all dialogues (this is a must-read)
c) Aristotle: Metaphysics, Nicomachean Ethics and a book that interprets the Metaphysics (don't know any works in English for this, sorry)

+ stoicism: Seneca's letters and Marcus Aurelius' Meditations
+ epicureanism: once again I don't know anything in English regarding this one
(both of these are optional, can be omitted)

More recommendations for getting into philosophy:

You might want to begin your journey with a quick (or long if you like) overview of philosophy. I suggest you to read Windelband's History of Philosophy for a (very) short overview or Copleston's History of Philosophy in case you wish to acquire (a lot more) knowledge.

Additional useful introductory reads:
a) metaphysics: Garrett's What is this thing called metaphysics? It's a really simple introductory book

b) ethics: an introduction into ethics by Peter Singer, can't quite remember the exact name of the book but you'll easily find it for sure

c) epistemology: a tedious field... I suggest you to begin with Descartes' meditations and skepticism (certain presocratic philosophers - the sophists, especially Gorgias, challenged the traditional common-sense approach to knowledge, but Descartes fundamentally questioned the traditional Plato's definition of knowledge from Theaetetus "justified true belief"). The point is, I think you should start with the skeptics and work your way from there.

>Plato (all dialogues)

What do you mean by this? I have no familiarity with how philosophy is recorded. Is a dialogue the same as a book? Is there a comprehensive list of Plato's works to read, and in what order?

It seems to be common knowledge that he's the ultimate prerequisite for all of Western philosophy, and do like some of the ideas of his I've heard of.

Not OP, but does anyone have a skeletal view of philosophy overall? What are the major branches and how is it organized?

Here's my currently mental picture:

The biggest divides are metaphysics (how does the world work, in the sense of what's real, what exists, etc.), epistemology (how do we know what's true, how do we obtain knowledge, etc.), and ethics (what is morally right, how should we live our lives, etc.). But then where do things like aesthetics, or free will, or language fit in? And then doesn't religion smear across all three?

bump

just get the complete works of Plato

a dialogue was a tool he used, where he'd basically record a conversation and try to lead people to a certain point

Just read the philosophers you want to read. If you're not understanding anything, then read the ones the philosopher is referencing. Beware though, If you do this kind of recursive reading too many times you'll end up with the greeks.

Another option is companion books. There are tons of them for the most important philosophers.

Are companion books a good idea if I want to learn about a LOT of philosophers? Isn't it cheating? Or is it easier to understand when someone has "translated" into modern era dialect?

I feel like I just don't have time to read 100 books just to understand what 4 guys thought. I'd rather read 100 books and understand what 100, or more, guys thought.

Sophie's world is a good introduction.

Otherwise, it depends on what you want to learn. Philosophy is a rather broad field, and I wouldn't want to give you shit you don't want to read.

As such, you always can use wikipedia for a broad picture of philosophy, and pick something that is more and more precise as you understand more things.

Philosophy books are rather hard to understand for someone outside of the field (hell, even for us so), so I'd suggest synthesis about a theme or philosophical stream.

And sorry I didn't read the rest of your posts OP. Still, get that free link. plato.stanford.edu/

philosophy:
1. metaphysics (notable sub-field: ontology)
2. epistemology
3. ethics
4. aesthetics
5. language (philosophical approach to language is different than linguistics, although they can overlap
6. logic (it is a branch of mathematics but at the same time logic plays a fundamental role in the analysis of language)

Do you know who the big people in language to read are? It's something I'm interested in.

Also, in general, who are some big modern philosophers worth reading? Modern meaning anyone active in the 1900s, possibly still alive.

Not him, but
>Rawls, Theory of Justice
>Foucault
>Sartre
>Heidegger albeit I hate him
>There's more but I'm lazy

Foucault and Sartre caught my attention for other reasons. Which of their works are good for an introduction to language?

It is not exactly cheating, but there are three main problems: I think the most valuable thing about a philosopher is not so much their theory, but their way of thinking and arguing (their style), and you can only get this raw going directly to their text (if they were alive I'd consider even talking to them directly). A companion gives you the theory, but sheilds you from the style.

The second thing is interpretation. By reading a companion book, you're gonna end up getting the same interpretation as the companion book author. You end up paying attetion to what he thinks is important, instead of creating your own interpretation.

The last thing is reading comprehension. Philosophers are generally hard to read. It only gets easier if you face the text directly trying to understand as much as you can (failing, but getting better eventually).

But they sure make things more palatable. It is a trade-off.

>philosophy of language
1. His royal highness, Ludwig Wittgenstein (read the Tractatus)
2. Bertrand Russel
3. Rudolf Carnap
4. Gilbert Ryle
5. J. L. Austin
6. W. O. Quine

Keep in mind that the philosophy of language is extremely difficult to read/understand. Especially the works of Carnap.

One more thing to mention: Ryle and Austin aren't nearly as significant as the others that I have mentioned, but they approached language from a different angle, so to speak. They focused on the ordinary language, therefore they are called the philosophers of the ordinary language.

>Should I read essays before books
It makes the reading easier, but there's always more interpretation and you could end up following one.

>criticisms?
They're good as you can understand what you read more as the flaws are exposed. Plus it avoids falling in the trap of >"X said everything that had to be said"

For anything basic, get on wikipedia. I'm not memeing, there's always references and a general comprehension of the idea.

Sadly I didn't have a lot of lessons about language. Can't really give anything. Perhaps look into rhetorics.

Basically Plato wrote fiction, but with philosophy in mind. On the other spectrum, you have the likes of Kant, which is highly technical, and not easy to read. However, being more literate doesn't mean the philosophy meaning is easier to understand.

>Plato is easier to read but harder to comprehend on a philosophical, precise level because of the way he decided to wrote (with dialogues)
>Kant is harder to read but easier to comprehend. Reading two pages and understanding them requires ten minutes or more.

Even as a philophy student I don't have time to read everything. Just get a book which is rather synthetic on a theme or stream. Ask your local librarian if you seek quality. They're supposed to be there for that.
Something about Rawls: Mulhall et Swift, « Liberals and Communitarians » (Wiley Blackwell)

Answered here Hope it helps.

bump

Plato wrote all his philosophy in the form of dialogues between two characters (usually Socrates and whoever his punching bag happens to be in that dialogue).

How do I determine if someone else's interpretation of a philosopher is right for me?

Usually you ask yourself whether you would wanna get a drink with them at a bar or not.

There's no "true" or "right" way to enter philosophy. It's true that starting with earlier philosophers is better, because later philosophy is influenced by earlier philosophy, so its hard to understand what comes later without what comes sooner.

However, if you don't like Plato, you won't want to slog through everything he wrote. Honestly, it might be okay to read a history of philosophy, and pick a couple guys you're interested in and read them. There's going to be a little prerequisite to most philosophers. For instance, David Hume has John Locke and Descartes as prerequisites, whereas Hegel has Kant and a shitload more, Kant has Hume and the dogmatists, Nietzsche has Schopenhauer and so forth.

If you want to get into Kant, for instance, here's what I'd do. Read the intro at plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant/. See what philosophers he was influenced by. Do you feel comfortable with their influences? No? Then read/consume material on the prereqs while occasionally looking into Kant until it starts making sense. It's really just a slow process and nothing can be rushed.

What are some philosophies about human individuality and nonconformity besides the transcendentalists?

In regards to ethics — Mill's Utilitarianism isn't a hard read at all, and I think is a good babbys first ethics book.

For Kantian ethics, I would recommend reading some of Christine Korsgaard's essays before trying to get into Kant himself. This is one I read back in high school and it gave me a good grasp of deontology: tannerlectures.utah.edu/_documents/a-to-z/k/korsgaard_2005.pdf

and this one: people.fas.harvard.edu/~korsgaar/CMK.FH.pdf

is a fantastic description of Kant's formula of humanity - it's a chapter from her book, which I think you can find most of, if not all, on her webpage.

and Nicomachean Ethics, of course. That all gives you a phil101 understanding of ethics.

>That all gives you a phil101 understanding of ethics.

I've taken PHI 101 before and remember Utilitarianism as the idea we should always act to maximize pleasure/minimize pain. For Kant, I remember the categorical imperative as only act if you think your actions would make sense if everyone in society were permitted to repeat them in your situation.

So Mill would say yes, you can steal if you'll save your life by stealing and not harm the life of the seller, while Kant would say no because if everyone stole, there'd be no sense of property and society may collapse.

How much deeper do I need to go for Ethics 101? Are there other philosophers worth noting that realm?

What are some philosophy books that read more like Veeky Forumserature? Something like Atlas Shrugged, but with deeper philosophical content, and preferably shorter.

I can't pretend to be incredibly well-read in philosophy — I mostly just read it because I find it interesting.

There is more to Kant than you mentioned, although you're on the right track; I think what he constructed is pretty beautiful and is worth understanding in its entirety. Try giving that Korsgaard paper on Animal Rights a try — she summarizes Kant in a digestible way. The first paragraph of the second .pdf even more so.

On a similar vein as those authors though, Rousseau and Locke are worth reading if political philosophy interests you. Rawls and Nozick for more contemporary thought.

>inb4 pleb
I also think the shit Zizek writes and says/psychoanalysis in general is incredibly fascinating. But that's unrelated to the stuff above.

I'd say it's probably best to read a general survey of the history of philosophy overall or alternatively watch an archived sequence of lectures on the history of philosophy (Wheaton College has a very detailed course posted in its entirety on Youtube). Once you have a solid understanding of that, take any specific field that particularly interests you and read an introduction to that field to get a more solid grasp of its technical terminology and major questions, and then dive into its major thinkers directly in the order that they occur historically.

This way you'll have the more general foundation necessary to understand each subsequent level of detail within any specific area that you want to learn about. It sounds like a lot of work, but philosophy is a very complex, wide-ranging, and fragmentary field and if you don't have your feet planted firmly before engaging in any one particular thinker, you're not going to have any fucking idea what they're talking about.

What kind of stuff does Zizek talk about? (I know I can search but I want your opinion.)

What do you rec for Locke and Rousseau? I know of Locke's tabula rasa of course (I'm American, so it's taught here), but what else does he have to offer?

Honestly just have to read Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men by Rousseau.

Pretty much anything by Dostoevsky, Candide by Voltaire, The Trial by Franz Kafka, The Divine Comedy, Paradise Lost

Is Candide where Voltaire makes his statements about free speech? If not, where can I learn more about philosophy of free speech?

>If not, where can I learn more about philosophy of free speech?

Areopagitica by John Stuart Mill.

Forgot to mention that Thus Spake Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche might also be up your alley.

Thanks, this looks interesting.

Yeah, it's on my list too, thanks.

fuck, my original comment was better but my computer crashed.

in summary: I enjoy Zizek's cultural critiques, which draw on a lot of film theory and Lacanian psychoanalysis. he has a movie on Netflix that's accessible, and videos on YouTube that range from pop-philosophy to university lectures.

in terms of Locke - Two Treatises. I'm an American too - this book is the philosophical underpinning for our declaration of independence.

Listen OP, fuck the people who say read all of the Greeks to get started.

This is what you do. You go to the wikipedia page on philosophy and look at the branches and what they study. You choose the one or two that sound interesting and look for the closest related works by Plato to read. There may not be one with Plato, it may be Aristotle or even later. Besides those, I would only recommend Plato's Euthyphro, Meno, Euthydemus, Republic (books I, V, VI), and Theaetetus.

After that read some summaries on Aristotle and Descartes, and then eventually some work on logic. That will probably be all you need unless the things you are interested in are more heavy on these past philosophers. For example if you like logic you might want to read Aristotle's Organon, or if you like Epistemology you'll have to read Descartes and then the other rationalists, empiricists, and idealists (but not all of them or all of their works)

The main thing is figuring out what you actually want to read. It's like any other field, you don't need to read anything and everything that has ever come out of this field to understand it, and you don't need to understand all of it.

If you did you would need to start learning ancient greek and study the presocratics and the mysteries for the rest of your life.

Brain fart, meant John Milton of course.