Recommend me some good philosophy

Frankychan · May 19, 2003, 04:12

I want to read some philosophy books and want your opinions on which philosophers I should read. I know of Rand, Kant, Nietsche, and Sartre.

Can you give a brief explanation on what their core theories are/is?

Kaak · May 19, 2003, 04:14

all good, though i would skip rand

If you like the matrix, read descarte. Also, philosophy is a very progressive thing. I would recommend you start earlier with some presocratics, particularly Epicurus, and the Atomists. It isn't heavy reading, and won't take you long. Then, you should spent atleast a brief amount of time on Socrates, Plato's "forms" and aristotle's Ethics. A lot of what is addressed by later philosophers specifically refers to these ideas, and you should have some understanding of them, atleast on a general level.

Inverse Icarus · May 19, 2003, 04:26

Rene Descartes is an interesting read, his "Dualist" ideas are interestign to say the least, they lend support to relgioius things.

to sum it up in a setence, "there exists something not of my body that is still me, and that is all i can prove exists".

Urban Ranger · May 19, 2003, 05:34

Descartes' Dualism probably stemmed from Plato, esp. "The Cave."

Cruddy · May 19, 2003, 05:59

Hmm... Bhuddism can give a few pointers, but I wouldn't recommend going totally Bhuddist. I don't think of it as a religion - there's no form of worship!

I like Thomas Aquinas and Merton... a bit old fashioned for some. heavily based on theology rather than philosophy.

Winston Churchill's books are a bit stodgy, and much more political than pure philosophy. But it does give a few pointers on progressive ideas.

I always found Nietsche unreadable. Clearly I'm not iup to that level yet. I'm not even sure I want to be!

And yes, the Greek classic philosopher's are still worth reading. It gives you a better appreciation of the later stuff.

BeBro · May 19, 2003, 06:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Frankychan
I want to read some philosophy books and want your opinions on which philosophers I should read. I know of Rand, Kant, Nietsche, and Sartre.

Kant is for Eurocoms. Read Hobbes

No, I´d recommend Kant, but (at least in German - don´t know English translations) it is the most difficult read I ever had (and I only read some things from him).

Reason is the central component of his philosophy. Reason, he says, (not interests or instict) "demands" (hm, not sure if that is explained correctly) certain behaviour. This is not realistic you might say, but Kant is an Idealist. His ideals are certainly worth to strive for

loinburger · May 19, 2003, 09:16

I got a lot of use out of Habermas's Discourse Ethics, but I oughta warn you that his writing is incredibly dense. He uses these bizarre, nonsensical indexing systems in his writing, and I suspect that he does it just to make reading him all the more difficult.

I've been intending to read Sartre, but I've had that intention for the past two years -- it's difficult to find the time.

BeBro · May 19, 2003, 09:47

Quote:

Originally posted by loinburger
He uses these bizarre, nonsensical indexing systems in his writing, and I suspect that he does it just to make reading him all the more difficult.

Must be a conspiracy of philosophers.

Habermas is a must for me for the future. Maybe they´ll have a course at the uni which is related to his works then I could take the chance and read him then, it´s better if you have some other guys around who struggle with the same stuff. If not, then I´ll read him just for me.

loinburger · May 19, 2003, 09:54

His favorite tactic is to fool you into believing that he's using a basic heirarchical outline system, when in fact there's no heirarchy involved at all.

"Section I.A.1? Sure, makes sense, we'll start at the beginning!"
"Section I.A.2? Hooray, next section!"
"Section I.B.2? Wait just a minute..."
"Section II.C.2? **** off, Habermas."

BeBro · May 19, 2003, 09:58

I hope he uses footnotes longer than the text above too

Otherwise I´d be disappointed.

loinburger · May 19, 2003, 09:59

But of course! Wouldn't be much of a modern philosopher if half of his writing weren't footnotes...

BeBro · May 19, 2003, 10:07

Wutang!*

-------------------------------------------------------------------
*here I use "Wutang!" as an expression of agreement, in contrast to the classic Old-Dirty-Bastardist school of Wutangism, where it is reserved for the wutangist children

MRT144 · May 19, 2003, 10:08

what is ODBs clothing line called?

OzzyKP · May 19, 2003, 10:08

Nietzche is all about the "Will to Power"

He feels that the moral way through life is to do whatever it takes to amass the most power for yourself and be the most advanced, powerful human possible. Do whatever you want, whenever you want, and don't let anyone else get in your way.

His is the philosophy of bullies and despots everywhere.

Bosh · May 19, 2003, 11:09

try Hume's An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding for some good Empiricist epistemology and metaphysics, but my favorite still has to be the Chuangtzu which is the second most famous Taoist text...

Arrian · May 19, 2003, 11:12

Quote:

Nietzche

Was out of his ****ing mind.

He was also big on the idea that society is an artificial construct, designed to protect our feeble minds from the awful reality of human nature. And, of course, the only people who could tear aside this "veil" were the Great Men (Ubermensch or somesuch) who, accordingly to Nietzche, could do just about anything.

I am above the Law! [/Southpark]

-Arrian

Laertes · May 19, 2003, 11:14

Sartre is very difficult to read. I bought "Being and Nothingness" and have tried several times to read it but never got further than a couple of pages. Ugh

alva · May 19, 2003, 11:32

To start with philosophy (at the risk of sounding pedantic) start of with with "Sofie's world" - Gardner(?). It gives some nice introduvtions to all the philosophies through the ages.
-

That's not really my interpretation on Nietzsche, for me it's about becoming more then you are.

Zero · May 19, 2003, 11:36

No one mentioned Tao of Poo yet...

Agathon · May 19, 2003, 11:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Kaak
I would recommend you start earlier with some presocratics, particularly Epicurus, and the Atomists. It isn't heavy reading, and won't take you long.

Epicurus is post-socratic.

Try reading some popular Russell. It's accessible and not prone to flaky misinterpretations.

Agathon · May 19, 2003, 11:42

And Habermas is not generally studied by professional philosophers. Nor are Derrida or Kristeva or any of those other "cranks". Basically, if a contemporary philosopher wraps up his arguments in excessive verbiage and is loved by literary theorists, he isn't a serious thinker.

I'd be willing to argue that this stuff isn't philosophy, but a peculiar kind of literature.

Bosh · May 19, 2003, 11:49

Quote:

No one mentioned Tao of Poo yet...

Cute book. Works as a decent introduction to Taoism.

Urban Ranger · May 19, 2003, 12:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Agathon
Try reading some popular Russell. It's accessible and not prone to flaky misinterpretations.

Russell is good, but start with something easy, such as "Why I am not a Christian" instead of "Limits of Knowledge."

Urban Ranger · May 19, 2003, 12:34

Quote:

Originally posted by Boshko
Cute book. Works as a decent introduction to Taoism.

Nah, The Tao of Motorcycle Maintanence is better.

Bosh · May 19, 2003, 12:44

zen not tao UR

and it is a great book

Cruddy · May 19, 2003, 12:49

"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"

Took me years to get into it - well worth the effort.

Ramo · May 19, 2003, 13:53

I've never read a good philosophy book. They all put me to sleep. And they usually are logically total crap, without the sort of rigor that mathematics has.

My advice is to work out philosophy for yourself; you don't need blowhards telling you how to think.

Japher · May 19, 2003, 13:55

Read "Apolyon: The OT Board"

Good mix of views with a lot of humor

Imran Siddiqui · May 19, 2003, 15:11

Quote:

Nietzche is all about the "Will to Power"

He feels that the moral way through life is to do whatever it takes to amass the most power for yourself and be the most advanced, powerful human possible. Do whatever you want, whenever you want, and don't let anyone else get in your way.

It seems someone doesn't like Nietzche

.

He also states that society is constructed to keep all the masses like sheep. Certain truthes are drilled into the heads of people until they believe them and follow them and simply nod. Nietzche says there is no absolute truth or morality and those great men, who don't fall into the idea of being sheep should form their own truths and morals and cast away the constructs of society. The thing to grasp is power, but not for its own sake, but because with power you are truely free of the hive-mind of the mass and society. In the end, power is about freedom to Nietzche. Those that break the mold are the ones who are truely free, while those that follow, while they may say they are free, are really enslaved.

Personally I love Nietzche, but your milage may vary

.

Eli · May 19, 2003, 15:16

Ignore. Me stoopid.