Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

news.ycombinator.com

31–40 of 293 posts

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#31

So a lot of philosophical writing references a sort of general canon, at least as far as western thinking is concerned. Other traditions I'm sure have their own details but I can't speak intelligently to them. The field is enormous, and without more specific information regarding your goals it is difficult to pinpoint the classics in subfields that may interest you. That said, there are a few highlights I think you'r…

I'd add Heidegger's Being and Time to that list, and Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra or The Gay Science to that list.

These are are probably the most significant works of Continental philosophy, and should definitely take precedence of Foucault, who's really the only representative of Continental philosophy (with the exception of maybe Hegel) on your list.

It should also be made clear that plato.standford.edu is a highly biased site that mostly depicts philosophy from an Analytic perspective, where Continental thought is barely represented (or misrepresented).

NOTE: As I tried to make clear in a later post in this thread, I'm not recommending Heidegger or Nietzsche for a beginner. I just think their works belong on the list of the person I replied to more than do a lot of the other people he lists (many of whom, by the way, also aren't good for beginners to start with).

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#32
post #20
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great list. Why no Greeks? Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics at least! I would add Sartre’s “Existentialism is a Humanism” as a short and readable intro to existentialism, followed by kierkegaard’s Being and Nothingness and Nietzche…maybe The Gay Science? (I am biased towards existentialism) EDIT I’m sure to get carried away, but some utilitarians would be good. Bertrand Russell is quite…

For existentialism/absurdism, you should probably include The Myth of Sisyphus by Albert Camus

Absolutely. Great addition.

(To this day, I feel like maybe one might…not imagine Sisyphus to be happy? But Camus getting there is valuable. And maybe he’s right!)

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#33
I was a philosophy major at a good (but not top) department. You are getting a lot of advice from autodidacts here that is well-intentioned but, in my view, unproductive.

First, as a general heuristic, if there's some topic (in philosophy or otherwise) you want to learn, find syllabuses of courses in that subject at good universities and figure out what books they use.

If you do this for philosophy courses, you will find either anthologies of (contemporary) articles, or modern textbooks like Jaegwon Kim's Philosophy of Mind. At a high level, these more or less follow the same format (after perhaps some historical prologue). A reasonable view is presented, then in the next chapter (or essay) an important objection is discussed. This goes on for a while until you understand the strengths and weaknesses of various positions. At the end, you may favor one or another, but rarely is there is a clear winner.

Note that philosophy is distinct from the history of philosophy. If you care about what is true, and not the historical development of ideas, there's not much point in reading things written before, say, 1900, or even 1950. So no Hume or Hegel or whatever. In general these texts are poorly written and unclear compared to modern ones. And of course, they can't treat the developments that have taken place in the intervening years. Consider an analogy: you would not read Newton's original manuscripts to learn calculus.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is a good reference work, but it presents mainly literature overviews, not pedagogical essays. Again, you wouldn't read an encyclopedia to learn math; it is similarly unwise here.

You write about developing models that address "the bigger questions of life," and "a personal philosophy." This is not something that contemporary academic philosophy talks much about, at least in the broad sense. But, in this direction, you might enjoy "Six Myths About the Good Life: Thinking About What Has Value" by Joel Kupperman. There's a good review of the book here: https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/six-myths-about-the-good-life-think....

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#34
I recommend the Philosophise This podcast[0]. It has a lot of episodes on the classic philosophers but it also delves into some of the contemporary philosophers that I find very interesting. I lot of other philosophical discussions seem to act like philsophy stopped around Russell and Wittgenstein.

[0]https://www.philosophizethis.org/

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#36
post #9
post #7

A long time ago someone recommended to me a small Norwegian book called Sophies World [0] as a very basic introduction to the history of philosophy and its served well. It was written by a teacher and geared at young adults. So its not a rigorous introduction. But its a short read and by the end you'll have enough leads to follow. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie%27s_World

I'd also recommend Sophie's World as a jumping off point into multiple "canon" works as referend by another poster. I'm sure people out there criticize it as not rigorous or full of inaccuracies, but I've found it an easy read that gives a good overview into the works of western philosophy.

I’ve seen many syllabi that include this book. I haven’t read it myself but have met some smart/thoughtful students of philosophy who did and value it highly.

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#37
Plato’s dialogues are mostly accessible and deal with basic philosophical questions. He was not the first philosopher, but his works are a great starting point to understanding the foundations of western philosophy. I forget the names of each one, but the series of dialogues involving Socrates’s trial and imprisonment are quick to read and thought-provoking. The best part of Plato is that he doesn’t just tell you what he thinks, he teaches you how to think critically and philosophically.

Once you’ve finished Plato, you can move onto Aristotle, particularly his Ethics.

As for “how to deal with bad things,” the Stoics are very popular now. Also check out the Epicureans. I think you should balance out these views with alternate approaches, maybe from Laozi.

After that, you may be interested in the rationalist-empiricist debate. (I’m skipping over a lot of medieval work that laid the foundations for this.) Descartes and Hume are the most readable of each group, respectively, in my experience.

If you are interested, you can move onto questions of “the meaning of life” or however you want to phrase it. A lot of this work rests on the very difficult works of Hegel and Kant, which would take a ton of time and effort to read and are probably not worth it for a non-academic. Kierkegaard is wonderful but also difficult to read. Fortunately at this stage, there are novelists who have read this stuff and put it into novels. Dostoyevsky and Camus provide a good synthesis of existential thought, coming to very different conclusions.

Everything I’ve mentioned in this comment can be read in a year or less, assuming you read at least the major one or two works from each author I’ve mentioned. At that point you won’t have an academic understanding of the field, but you’ll have a solid practical philosophical foundation for your daily life.

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#38

So a lot of philosophical writing references a sort of general canon, at least as far as western thinking is concerned. Other traditions I'm sure have their own details but I can't speak intelligently to them. The field is enormous, and without more specific information regarding your goals it is difficult to pinpoint the classics in subfields that may interest you. That said, there are a few highlights I think you'r…

I'd add Heidegger's Being and Time to that list, and Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra or The Gay Science to that list. These are are probably the most significant works of Continental philosophy, and should definitely take precedence of Foucault, who's really the only representative of Continental philosophy (with the exception of maybe Hegel) on your list. It should also be made clear that plato.standford.edu is a…

Yet again, recommending abstruse works. Being and Time is absurdly difficult for even Philosophy Ph.Ds to parse. Worse yet, Phenomenology is kinda like metaphysics in that many people in the field don't believe that it's even truly legitimate. Heidegger had to go and claim that his biggest fans (Sartre) actually compleatly misunderstood him entirely. If Sartre can't get it right, can a random newcomer understand it the way Heidegger intended?

As far as Nietzsche goes - by his own words (he is very clear about this in one of his books - I think it was ecco homo) - you're supposed to have read ALL of the works of Kant and then Schopenhauer before you can even understand Nietzsche. Not that many people agree with him about that, but it did color my perception of him (and the study of the two that he asks the readers to look into does a massive amount to explain why Nietzsche sounds like such an edgelord)...

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#39
The Story of Philosophy by Will Durant is a good if slightly outdated intro. I also read Sophie's World and would recommend reading that first, but you can skip it if you don't want to read fiction.

If you want something that talks purely about ideas without reference to the famous names, Bertrand Russell's book The Problems of Philosophy is also good. It give a very good overview of the major questions that philosophy keeps coming back to without dwelling too much on the history of the different answers. He also gives his own opinions on some of these issues, but you don't have to take that too seriously.

Re: Ask HN: Learning about philosophy

#40
post #17

So a lot of philosophical writing references a sort of general canon, at least as far as western thinking is concerned. Other traditions I'm sure have their own details but I can't speak intelligently to them. The field is enormous, and without more specific information regarding your goals it is difficult to pinpoint the classics in subfields that may interest you. That said, there are a few highlights I think you'r…

This is a great list. Why no Greeks? Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics at least! I would add Sartre’s “Existentialism is a Humanism” as a short and readable intro to existentialism, followed by kierkegaard’s Being and Nothingness and Nietzche…maybe The Gay Science? (I am biased towards existentialism) EDIT I’m sure to get carried away, but some utilitarians would be good. Bertrand Russell is quite…

BTW - Sartre goes on later in life to claim that Marxism and Existentialism are basically identical, or rather that Marxism is the sociological analog to Existentialism in his work "Search for a Method". This is not very well known among anyone except the Sartre hacks, but is important to mention. Same with Camus and his early relationship with leftist politics.

Source if you don't believe me (see conclusion and checkout a full copy for further context): https://www.bard.edu/library/arendt/pdfs/Sartre-Search.pdf

Post reply on HN