Claims to be interested in philosophy

>claims to claim something but doesn't claim what a claim is

Do you even read philosophy oaml?

I agree and every other forum is a hugbox

I watch lectures on 4x speed allowing me to take in information more quickly than I could with looking at text. The combination of the visual and the audible allows for even greater efficiency in information transfer. Face it, your archaic medium of book reading is dead, loser. At this point you're no better than the oral traditionalists who told Homer he was a fag for writing shit down. That's what Harris is, a modern Homer.

>I watch lectures on 4x speed allowing me to take in information more quickly than I could with looking at text.
You must be a pretty slow-ass reader, then.

He's a subby

>claims to be interested in philosophy
>only reads the literature
Stop

I'm not some old fag who grew up in the dark ages before the internet and I wasn't a book reading in nerd in high school. Don't worry though, I'll be at 800 wpm soon enough.

Start with the Greeks

It's a sign of genius to explain a complex concept in simple terms.

If both get the point across, the podcast/video is objectively superior to the book, in terms of teaching others.

It's genius on the part of the explainer, who understands all the complexity because they read the fucking book. The explainee will only ever have the jist of it until they read the book.

Can't believe we're having this fucking discussion.

Still better than those that claim to be interested in philosophy and only read about some weird Hindu/New Age 5th dimensional energy while smoking joints.

Picked up my first philosophy book.
>pic related

Kinda light, so any recommendations?

>claims to be interested in philosophy
stop

Bin that shit and start with the fucking Greeks

Just take it slow. Buy a couple of entry level philosophy textbooks to get a grasp of the concepts and questions of philosophy.

docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1

This google doc is a comprehensive guide to western philosophy with plenty of secondary sources. Plenty of people are going to insist that philosophy needs to be read chronologically but I don't see anything wrong with reading the guy you're most interested in and then going back to his predecessors and students. People don't get into Jazz by studying it's origins, they get a Coltrane record and work both ways.

the problem occurs when you come here and start spouting your half-digested regurgitations, and then, when people tell you the point is more subtle than you're allowing, throw a hissy fit and call everyone jewish conspirators.

the subtlety of understanding required to really understand philosophical points to a degree that it becomes possible to pass judgment on them requires spending long hours grappling with a text, sometimes with single paragraphs, wrest the point from it. philosophy is at the edge of thought. it thinks what has not been thought before. why should we expect that the language for those as-yet unknown thoughts be easy? and why should you expect that the development of a point over 700 pages retains any of its value when compressed and domesticated by a 10 minute youtube video?

if it seems like babble, that's your own failure to meet it

Dont bother with these retards, user
Just shitpost, honesty isnt worth shit around here, you know that

>philosophy
>>just """information""" to be """""absorbed"""""

yeah you've really learned a lot

Kek what an autist

>That's how downhill Veeky Forums has gone.
I wish I was on your level, user. By now I'm pretty sure that these "Is this bait Veeky Forums used to be good" posts are in and of themselves bait. Veeky Forums was never good.

If you watch Half Hour Hegel then you get literally all of the PHenomenology plus useful ancillary material

Holy shit. Are there other guides like this (maybe for other subjects)?

I'm aware of Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums wikis, but this looks pretty comprehensive.

turn the bass down my dude

This is masterfully written bait

Sure but there's a difference between dozens and dozens of half-hour lectures and a single three minute video.

That's totally me, but that's the exact level of knowledge I want. Just broad strokes.

Niet cyka blyat cyka

KEK

I am a slow-ass reader. Anyone to improve my reading speed without sacrificing retention?

>into psychedelics
>never read doors of perception

youtube.com/watch?v=8v0ab-DZZ1k&t=2s

>Anyone to improve my reading speed without sacrificing retention?
Not really. "Speed reading" is a useful skill to develop, but you should use it selectively to rapidly read texts that are low signal-to-noise or of low relative value (e.g. news articles, blogs, pop books). In these cases, the drop in retention doesn't matter that much. If you're reading a piece of philosophy, or anything that contains profound, important thoughts, then you generally shouldn't speed read it.

As for resources on speed reading techniques... they're all over the internet. The basic tips are limit subvocalization (it's impossible to completely get rid of subvoc., but not paying attention to it does increase speed), limit inefficient eye movement, don't backread, etc. Once you know the techniques, it's just a matter of practice.

sound advice. Thanks.