I want to get deep into philosophy but I don't know where to start. I want a solid foundation before I get into more difficult philosophers like Kant, Hegel or Foucault. What books should I start with? Is there an online course where I can get study notes?
I tried reading Schopenhauer's "The World as Will and Representation" but gave up after like 20 pages because I couldn't understand it, and he kept making references to other philosophers I hadn't read.
tl;dr - how do I get started in philosophy, what is the path to take?
What is truth? What is real? How do you know what reality is? How do you know what truth is? Ask questions, think abstractly, rely on logic!
Robert Parker
Start with the Greeks and progress your reading chronologically. Fuck off, in the days of AOC and shill threads, this is allright.
Ethan Cook
For an overview read Russell's History of Western Philosophy and Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy
James Wright
Go to a community college, bring $100 and sign up for a Philosophy 101 class.
You can ask questions, plus they teach you all of the fundamental cornerstones of each of the philosophers you listed in your OP.
I did the very same thing, and it helped me immensely as far as getting my feet wet. I wouldn't suggest just relying on YouTube and Books to get you there. You will at least need someone who can help you.
My teacher's name was Mr. Knudsen (sp?) and he was this old fucker who took teaching very seriously. I don't doubt that I was more than lucky to have him as a teacher.
Plato's cave literally red pilled me forever. It is the original "red pill" story.
Thomas Jefferson's recommended reading list has it all. Perhaps start with Plato and the Republic.
Aiden Young
Yes, let's just go over one of the more difficult reads out there as our starting point... FFS
John Powell
I started with Meditations and Seneca desu.
Justin Turner
>Thomas Jefferson freemason jew
Benjamin Hall
I can't help but think you are acting subhuman due to the fact you are bringing a negative light to wanting to learn more through reading.
Jaxson Diaz
"I'm wanting to learn math, but I don't know where to start. Any suggestions?" > "Oh, my dude, you need to read Einstein's Principles of Relativity."
Isaac Bell
Will Wheaton lectures on YouTube
Chase Torres
If you are not at least 30 I'd back off. Start with Literature. Read the World Classics and the best literature out there. It will:
1 - Give you the language tools you need to describe reality. 2 - Amplify your imagination 3 - Introduce you to new REAL situations from which you can start thinking about stuff
No point starting philosophy without a wide ranges of experiences ( whether directly or indirectly lived ) from which you can take the elements you will use to think about stuff.
Also watch the best movies out there and the best operas/classical pieces. This will get you busy until you are 30ish. After that you can start with the philosophy.
Plato, almost everytime he talks about a philosphical topic he either starts with Homer's works or points out to a certain experienced that he and his listener both where a witness to.
Parker Nguyen
someone draw a merchant on that face instead of Plato
James Peterson
Perhaps as you finish the Jefferson reading list add some Carlyle to offset the modern crisis of authority.
Nathaniel James
I disagree. If you are specifically wanting to understand the origins of logic, you MUST do so in a chronological order, otherwise you are just spinning your wheels and cherry picking ideologies that suit your interests.
For me, hedonism was one of the bigger speed bumps for me.
In the end, Descartes was the ultimate objective reality realization for me.
Sebastian Mitchell
philosophy is rationalizations of sensitive brainlets
the truth is simple, you are a tiny part of nature and it’s all about survival of the fittest. we are so peaceful that our weak people even started not to reproduce anymore
Angel Green
Don't worry user. Soon someone will post the "Books - How do they work" info graphic with all the books to for you to read. I myself would also add pic related once you read The Prince
I talked about preprations before starting philosophy. As you start philosophy you should probably do it in order, yes, but I'm not talking about that here.
Also be careful with that "logical" fetishism. Logic is the analysis of a hypothesis starting from a premise. Logic alone cannot explain reality. Only reality explains reality.
Noah Thompson
Start with early stuff, in chronological order.
Scaffold learning by reading Spark notes BEFORE you read a particular work of a philosopher. Having a basic idea of what you are reading aids retention enormously.
Write paper notes, a page will do, this will greatly enhance your ability to recall and synthesise.
Lastly, give yourself time, it will take a several years to get through the whole western canon.
Jace Evans
>Logic is the analysis of a hypothesis starting from a premise. Logic alone cannot explain reality. Only reality explains reality.
Yes, and the same can be said of Science. It isn't a tool that is universal truth. It is a tool that allows you to identify what is (or isn't) truth.
>If you are not at least 30 I'd back off. it's starting to show how frustrated you are of not having access to a decent education over in Brazil, but really it's no valid reason to spread such bullshit. There's no age requirement to begin philosophy, for example in France they teach philosophy in colleges for 14/15 years old students, then again they can start reading Victor Hugo novels at 9 over there. We wouldn't even have philosophy teachers in the first place with your stupid approach I mean. What the fuck is this minimum age requirements to educate coming from? your ass? you think every kid is equal ? that every brain is equal?
Never let anyone dictate what interest you should have nor at what time.
David Bennett
Perhaps what you will discover is the "dark ages" were enlightened, and the "enlightenment" has spread darkness. Cheers user.
Daniel Myers
There is a fantastic board called /lit/. Visit them regularly. Look at their recommendations. Lurk their threads. Before starting reading Philosophy, do a course or read a book about an introduction to Philosophy and then read about the history of Philosophy in general, so you know the major names and an idea of what they said.
Having that general picture, it's easier to comprehend the importance of each book and author and you will be more efficient at reading them and at learning to think critically.
That's when you finally start with the Greeks and follow whatever path you want to focus on.
I often wondered why Philosophy isn't taught in early ages for teenagers. This is why. I agree with you, but also feel that nurturing the ignorance of the youth is a dangerous game to play.
Hunter Baker
It's hard to read because you first need to get the basics down.
I would start with "Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy"
There is a novel called "Sophie's world". Start with reading that. It's death easy to read and to understand, You can download a epub or pdf for free and its even available in dutch. (De wereld van sofie)
This is political science, not philosophy you retard.
Cooper Rogers
I didn't get educated in Brazil, I did my pre-college education in Portugal and ( guess..) France.
Yes, I had philosophy in France but it was absolutely vapid. It can hardly be called philosophy, moreso a mix of political science and some XX century existencialists. Do you think 15 year olds are generally READY to think about the nature of universal things and the have a whole grasp of reality?
Also I didn't say "YOU MUSTN'T", I said " I would back off". I'm giving advice here. There's no age requirements, but philosophy is the study of reality and the only way you can have a certain "database" from which you can draw the REAL experiences you then will think about it's through direct experiences and reading of literatture. There's no philosopher that also didn't read extensively fiction, it simply doesn't exist.
Say you want to think about War. If you never been in one you must read the great literature that will describe and almost "put you there". This can be applied to pretty much everything.
William Nelson
Meditations on First Philosophy and the Discourses by Descartes are a good introduction, also read Evola, he'll give you the keys.
As you read and understand the beauty of Jefferson's reading list, examine carefully the architecture, art poems, architecture, cathedrals, and music of Western Civilizations past. This is our spirit. Some call it a reflection of the Holy Spirit. Now compare the with the present. As you can see, the West has not "progressed" under secular humanism and the "enlightenment. We have degenerated.
Parker Hernandez
>not educating yourself to understand authors you disagree with Wew lad.
Thomas Brown
Philosophy is an endless circle jerk of fedora tipping faggots that think A or B about something.
No one with any seriousness considers Descartes the ultimate in anything, especially not in areas of philosophy. youtube.com/watch?v=YF_jzE0ZNDY
Owen Taylor
No real philosophy is the art to express your thoughts and understand reality through the prism of truth, observation and experience. It has nothing to do with circle jerking, philosophy is characterized by debate and dialectic.
Go to Ebay and pick up the works of plato by Thomas Taylor (5 volumes). Thomas Taylor was the first neoplatonist to translate the works of Plato and from a historiographers perspective he's a "better" translator because he had a true mindset of a platonist and could get more of the denotative meaning oh what the Greeks were saying across. It's a literal translation, not a translation of a translation or a transcription.
Start with "First Alcibiades". then the laws and republic. They'll make several inferences to Homer's works and Plato's "Timaeus" which you should read next. "Alcibiades" will teach you to have an open mind, and to not rely on your predisposition or charisma to get you everywhere in life. Laws and Republic will show you how history has repeated itself since its first recording.
>Go to a community college, bring $100 and sign up for a Philosophy 101 class.
This is exactly what proper philosophy teaches you NOT to do.
Fun fact: you can't fix stupid countrymen. They should be reading books instead of investing their time in pointless materialism.
*first Englishman to translate the works of plato into English*. Before then it was in Latin and other languages.
Michael Martinez
>This is exactly what proper philosophy teaches you NOT to do.
This is exactly what a proper philosophy teacher would say is a "non-argument".
Cameron Baker
No answer to your question will or can be provided without knowing your intent
Do you want to eventually become a politician, a revolutionary, a writer, or all of the above yourself?
Levi Hughes
You can try starting with the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosphy if you want to start with just studying notes. They have articles on pretty much anything. You’ll be able to understand the gist of the major topics by reading articles on there and following the links articles have to other articles.
Try searching for a topic or school you’re interested in philosphy (philosphy of mind [dualism, reductive and non-reductive phsicalism, idealism, skepticism], ethics/morality [deontology, consequentialism, virtue ethics, and moral nihilism/error theory], epistemology, ontology, existentialism, stoicism, Thomism, pragmatism, logical positivism/empiricism , ancient philosphy, analytic, postmodern) followed by SEP and see where it leads ya
Landon Kelly
get out while you still can
Gabriel Morris
There is absolute no need for polluting your brain with postmodern deconstructivists which is lowest point of philosophy per se. Philosophy is ment for understanding nature of anything not to tangle it just for sake of new ideas. + the guy was a fucking schizo degenerate, why would some one would be needing to seek answers in schizo degenerate nightmares?
Mason Miller
No actually they had a term for people like those. "Sophists", or "Instead of leaving alone the parts that can't be explained, I'll invent my own shit and they won't know the difference".
>Do you think 15 year olds are generally READY to think about the nature of universal things and the have a whole grasp of reality?
I think there are adults fully grown out there who will never be ready to think about anything much outside of their immediate environment. And that is precisely why an early education is so important. Because when you've spent your childhood not using your brain much, not thinking much, not learning much, not comprehending much even, then it's unlikely you will ever do these things effectively as an adult. Brains are to be used a lot and at a young age if possible. They are like a muscle, they need exercise, and early practitioners tend to fare much better in life. So yes I see value in teaching philosophy before adulthood. I fail to see any cons, I mean sure programs can be lame as can be professors. shit happens. The biology of the brain itself changes after your teenage years, you can't absorb as well as you used to, your biological hard drive is now commencing defragmentations and reallocating space so to speak. Neuronal connections go extinct at a much higher rate. You will have a much harder time trying to learn languages for instance as is well documented.
Robert Clark
Philosophize this is a really good podcast that starts from the very beginning and goes up til now. The episodes are only 30 minutes and the host does a great job of making the material approachable. Than if you like, you can pick up the book he’s referencing and read it yourself now that you have the basics of it down.
(0. History of philosophy) 1. Introduction to philosophy 2. Introduction to epistemology 3. Introduction to logic 4. Introduction to ethics 5. Introduction to political philosophy 6. Introduction to metaphysics 7. Introduction to the philosophy of mind 8. Introduction to the philosophy of science 9. Introduction to the philosophy of language
Jack Hill
kek
Hunter Edwards
Thanks user
Jayden Morales
where can I find them?
Hudson Martinez
Just checked on libgen and didn't find anything with the title Works of Plato by Thomas Taylor. I did find something by him called The Theology of Plato. Is that the same thing, or just one of the volumes?
Charles Lewis
Library or bookstore for books Library Genesis for e-books
Here is a bibliography E. Sober, Core Questions in Philosophy L. BonJour, Epistemology: Classical Problems and Responses V. Halbach, The Logic Manual J. Driver, Ethics. The Fundamentals J. Christman, Social and Political Philosophy. A Contemporary Introduction E. J. Lowe, A Survey of Metaphysics J. Kim, Philosophy of Mind A. Chalmers, What is This Thing Called Science W. Lycan, Philosophy of Language
Landon Hernandez
>I want to get deep into philosophy but I don't know where to start. Bertrand Russell History of Western Philosophy. The gook shit sucks anyway.
Sophie's World is based on History of Western Philosophy. Why not start with Sophie's World.
Grayson Lewis
This think for yourself.
Isaiah Ramirez
I suggest l Lucretius: On the nature of the things.
My favorite book. Really mind blowing about how much they could deduce from modern science with simple thought experiments. They didn't have the scientific method but developed many supra singly accurate theories.
Also, practice mathematics. Understand mathematics. I wouldn't start with Plato. He will indoctrinate and corrupt your perception. You should make your own philosophical conclusions on all topics before reading other people's ideas at which point you can modify and adapt your theories with the things and points of view you hadn't thought of. Then you need to read Plato first.
Zachary Baker
This is a history of philosophical ideas. If you want to actually gain insight into the structure if the ideas one should read the source material instead of any anthology.
Jaxon Ward
Don't pay attention to neoplatonists. Most of them put too much emphasis on Timaeus. They are mostly trying to cherry pick platos ideas to give their ideologies some legitimacy.
It's part of his series which includes "The theology of Plato" by Proclus. Proclus is good too you should read him and "The select works of Porphyry" from the series too.
Ya this guy makes a good point. You should read Homer if you haven't already in order to set up the western tradition. You need to read the illiad and the Odyssey if you haven't. They are actually pretty good reads too. Except the chapter that just lists the forces, you could skip that one. But a lot of characters will be mentioned later and the chapter gives back round on who they are. Most are just mentioned when the die "so and so's spear thrust through the jaw and into the eyesocket of so and so son of so and so, and he saw black" but some achieve extensive heroic feats.
"Go read Homer" > dude in OP admits he is literally at ground zero.
Stop trying to make this pedantic suggestion that it's sensible to read raw texts without any context or reference. You need can pretend that you are able to self-teach philosophy, but this is ridiculous given the entirely changing tide of philosophy.
Philosophy should be presented in a chronologically focused curriculum. You can not truly "know" philosophy unless you understand the underlying shift in thought and the reasons behind those changes in beliefs over time. Philosophy is properly observed as a linear process that flows through time as an entire system (aka logic). Logic - like Science isn't perfect.
It dissolves into ethics and then that all becomes a sort of Utopian form of idealism.
Consider an-caps vs commies. The only way their ideology works is in a perfect vacuum of their own code of ethics that align with their sense of virtue.
Crazy, dude. Really? I wonder if he's alive. I took his class about 8 years ago... Wish I could remember something specific about the class to see if we took it.
I was on a night class.
Jackson Wright
>Stop trying to make this pedantic suggestion that it's sensible to read raw texts without any context or reference. You need can pretend that you are able to self-teach philosophy, but this is ridiculous given the entirely changing tide of philosophy.
There is no law on learning how to live and die.
>Philosophy should be presented in a chronologically focused curriculum
It's not a linear problem though
>Philosophy is properly observed as a linear process that flows through time as an entire system (aka logic). Logic - like Science isn't perfect.
This doesn't even make sense. "flows through time" like it's a medium with properties or something. Time is a concept. It has no more existence than a unicorn.
>Consider an-caps vs commies. The only way their ideology works is in a perfect vacuum of their own code of ethics that align with their sense of virtue.
Right. Everything seeks what it is absent of. That is "The one". It is what (you) are absent of.
>There is no law on learning how to live and die. Not sure where the you thought I was citing laws...? Nice strawman.
> It's not a linear problem though Everything you observe is spatial and temporal... Prove me wrong. You can't. So to counter what you just said - Everything is a linear problem.
> This doesn't even make sense. "flows through time" like it's a medium with properties or something. Time is a concept. It has no more existence than a unicorn. Found the hippy who doesn't think time exists. Despite light.
> Right. Everything seeks what it is absent of. That is "The one". It is what (you) are absent of. More hippy talk. Another strawman and another failed argument. C'mon, dude. Are you even trying??
>not starting with trying to decipher cave paintings pleb
Mason Morris
>Not sure where the you thought I was citing laws...? Nice strawman.
A human lives, is conscious and then "dies"
>Everything you observe is spatial and temporal... Prove me wrong.
You're not saying anything of use. Descriptions are not explanations.
>Found the hippy who doesn't think time exists. Despite light.
despite..light? How does light give a measurement an attribute? Are you some kind of crackpot? Speaking of light; What's the difference between light and illumination (what is is vs what it does)?
>More hippy talk. Another strawman and another failed argument. C'mon, dude. Are you even trying??
" in a perfect vacuum of their own code of ethics that align with their sense of virtue." "Everything seeks what it is absent of"
I said the same fucking thing you did you retard. "Virtue" or "high moral standards" is not a tangible, quantifiable thing. It is ABSENT to the "natural process" of the materialistic animal, who seeks to do nothing but consume.
Nice strawman. No - I didn't say they were synonymous with one another. It's a comparison. Try not to be so willfully ignorant. Intellectual dishonesty is something I have no time for.
