Getting Grounded in Philosophy - Where Should I Start?

[SmileyEH]

I've never taken a philosphy course, and I'm taking a year off from school so I figured actually learning something while I'm away would be a good idea. What are some good books to start with to get down some philosophical fundamentals (stuff I'd learn in the first few college courses I suppose)? I'm a phsyics major and reasonably intelligent - I imagine I should pick stuff up pretty quickly but I just don't know where to start.

-SmileyEH

[Cerril]

You've probably got it covered already, but pick up some books on logic and critical thinking (writing). Probably the most accessible text I've read is 'how to think about weird things' (Schick and Vaughn) [another interesting book in the same vein is 'Logic and Mr. Limbaugh' (Perkins)]. A genuine textbook might give you some value as well, but I don't have any of them at hand. Something newer though, some older texts seem to be written just to be arcane.

Once you're comfortable interpreting arguments, just decide on an area of philosophy that you're interested in (religion, ethics, metaphysics [knowledge], formal logic, and aesthetics were some of my favorites) and pick up some books in that area. Start with what you like and work your way through opinions that vary. Usually you'll be well served picking up an 'intro to philosophy' text from a college. Often these are selections from a variety of sources put together by the instructor (in fact, for good surveys of areas, look for photocopied or college-published course materials, if you can manage to buy them without being a student).

The main difficulty you'll have trying to learn philosophers on your own until you've read a lot of what people have to say is separating the reasonable stuff from the complete junk. Some stuff will just sit wrong but other things (especially if you already share the viewpoint) will seem well-argued when really there's a lot to be desired. So finding sources that expose you to several viewpoints can help alleviate that, you have the opportunity to play them off each other.

Finding people to discuss philosophy with is another key. Friends, relatives... anyone who has an opinion and doesn't mind hearing yours is worth discussing these new views and arguments with.

Good luck!

[RicktheRuler]

1. Develop a timeline of the most important phil. works.

2. Purchase these books.

3. Read them, starting with the first one chronologically.

[raisins]

I don't think it is necessary to read philosophy in chronological order. The song remains the same. Stick with the philosophers who have the strongest writing style. This means Kant and Hegel are out. Both of them are important thinkers but you can get a fair idea of what they're about from commentaries and summaries and you can read them later if you get a hankering. The best writers among the philosophers are Plato - start with the elenchic dialogues plus Apology and Symposium, Nietzsche - Birth of Tragedy and Genealogy of Morals or any and Kierkegaard - get an anthology. A great philosopher to read in contrast to Plato and the theory of forms is Wittgenstein in the Philosophical Investigations and his idea of family resemblances. Wittgenstein is not the easiest read and that might be best approached in a class. A more modern philosopher who is also a great writer is Bernard Williams - Shame and Necessity and Truth and Truthfulness. All of the above are philosophers concerned with human nature and the question, how should one live? Stay away from the more academic philosophers until you develop an interest in their specialty, e.g. intentionality, science etc. Some other thinkers (not necessarily philosophers) who also write on human nature but are not in the same rank as the above: Marcus Aurelius, Heraclitus, Thucydides, Montaigne, Pascal, Machiavelli ...

There are lots of distinctions in philosophy, free will vs determinism, essentialism vs nominalism, etc. the most important one in my opinion is philosophy vs. rhetoric. The Closing of the American Mind might be a good entrance; he has a good sense of this distinction and why Plato was so focused on rhetoric.

regards,

raisins

[AleoMagus]

A couple excellent, and very small, easy to read books are:

'Think' by Simon Blackburn
'What does it all mean' by Thomas Nagel

I prefer these kinds of books (especially Nagel's) as introductions to philosophy, as I don't think that your first priority should be actually reading the classics themselves. Just dig into the issues in today's language and get a grounding in the subject matter before you decide to read the classics.

The next step then, is reading the classics. For this, I'd just pick up an anthology of some kind.

'Ten great works of philosophy' edited by Robet Paul Wolff. this is not nearly the best anthology, but it is nice because it is the size of a novel and can be read just about anywhere.

'Philosophic Classics: From Plato to Derrida' edited by Kauffmann and Baird. This is a really nice big anthology and pretty much has every major work that you'd want to read right away. It's missing a couple things I'd like, but for one volume it is the best there is.

You will also want a good book on logic and reasoning. For this, my favorite is:

'Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies' by John Woods, Andrew Irvine and Douglas Walton

Finally, you will want a good philosophy/logic reference book, like an encyclopedia of philosophy, or a good dictionary of philosophy. I own most of them, and the best are:

The Oxford Companion to Philosophy
The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy

Regards
Brad S

[FredJones888]

I agree. Read the oldest stuff first.

Philosophers "stand on the shoulders of giants" just like scientists do. Go back to the beginning.

[Jake (The Snake)]

Figure out a topic you are interested in reading about before anything else.

Philosophers write about so many different topics that it will become a waste of time if you just start reading one guy then another guy. Pick a topic and then read the different arguments about it.

[Cerril]

There are some exceptions. Russell's 'History of Western Philosophy' is considered an excellent book, but if you don't latch onto the style it can get very dry very quickly. But yeah, for the most part pick a topic and read within it.

[Cerril]

I'm hesitant to suggest something like that, in large part because I've never had an easy time reading the greeks or for that matter even medieval philosophers. I'd tend to suggest reading someone who can summarize what's gone before well. Some writers, though, are terrible about that and assume you've read more than you have (or, worse, give misinformation about previous philosophers' views to support their own claims).

There are two traps I worry about in anyone studying philosophy. First, trying to get to everything... you just can't. Even if you pick a very narrow range there's just too much to get to (I've found myself drawing a blank about even some major views of major philosophers just because I couldn't get to all of, say, Kant's works). The other concern is that if you don't work at broadening your views you can easily get attached to one philosopher or another. No writer is right about everything, but it's not always easy to see what's good and what's bad without being well read. A friend of mine I gave some of Bertrand Russell's books to showed me that, since he had limited interest in philosophy and so took the material in those books as Truth.

That's the thing about philosophy though, too many people approach it as something other than a method for clear thinking, and so you end up with a lot of 'camps' of devotees of one philosopher or another. The greeks are big targets, along with just about any big name since.

[Zeno]

Some good advice has been given but I feel the need to add a few comments. I think Bertrand Russell's 'History of Western Philiosophy' is a very good start to anyone tackling the subject of philosophy. Just take to heart what other posters have said about giving too much credence to any one persons views etc, Russell included. That said, it is a excellent book, in my opinion.

Another book that is good to pique your interest or to give a good overview and flavor of the large variety of thoughts and ideas in philosophy is A Dictionary of Philosophical Quotations, edited by A. J. Ayer and Jane O'Grady. I highly recommend this book. It gives a good read of all the views and sense, and nonsense, philosopher's have blubbered out over the years. It covers a wide range of ideas and time - ancient Greeks to the present.

For reference:

A Dictionary of Philosophy, by Antony Flew is a good reference that is also inexpensive but very well done.

The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, edited by Ted Honderich is also an excellent book. It is very comprehensive and covers almost all philosophical terms and schools and important individuals. It is almost an encyclopaedia of philosophy. It is a bit more expensive and runs about 1,000 pages but it is worth it.

-Zeno

[Bob Moss]

(Probably already been said) Think for yourself.

Bob

[Triumph36]

I'm just going to agree with this post, mostly. Plato and Nietschze's subjects are so wide that it can clue you in on what branch of philosophy you'd like to pursue further. I'd put Epictetus and La Rochefoucauld on that list of Marcus Aurelius, Thucydides, etc, just because they're interesting as well.

Being 'forced' to read certain philosophy can be painfully dull, but having an interest in one particular area will help you out a great deal when it comes to those duller works.. don't just read the 'greatest' or 'most important' writings, it's for your benefit, read what's interesting.

[jakethebake]

Rickey Williams method. Use a lot of mind-altering substances. Quit your job. Go live in a cave in India for a year.

[RicktheRuler]

Well, I am assuming he is intelligent enought to do it this way, as I think it is clearly the best way to go about such a project.

To the other poster, I think it is important to read them chronologically, in order to witness the progession of the field. As with any other discourse, it builds off of itself and if you do not understand what someone is reacting to it is dificult to understand the reaction.


Poorly written, sorry.

[drudman]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never taken a philosphy course, and I'm taking a year off from school so I figured actually learning something while I'm away would be a good idea. What are some good books to start with to get down some philosophical fundamentals (stuff I'd learn in the first few college courses I suppose)? I'm a phsyics major and reasonably intelligent - I imagine I should pick stuff up pretty quickly but I just don't know where to start.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]

Plato - The Republic
Descartes - Meditations
Kant - Critique of Pure Reason
Nietzsche - Beyond Good and Evil
Ayer - Language, Truth, and Logic

These are I think the big five. Plato is the original pimp of philosophy. Very little good work exsits between him and Descartes' Meditations. From there philosophy evolves through a number of people, but the biggest names are Kant and Nietzsche. The logical positivists (Ayer, Russell, Wittgenstein, etc.) shatter everything.

When you're done, you can start filling in the spaces.

Aristotle - Nicomachean Ethics
Locke - A Treatise Concerning Human Understanding
Hegel - The Philosophy of Right
Hume - An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
Sartre - Being and Nothingness

If you understand all of the above 10, you'll be in better shape than most B.A. philosophers.

[Bodhi]

The first courses you'd take would be Ancient and Modern philosophy, and Logic. You have likely already learned symbolic logic, so I would suggest some of the shorter Platonic Dialogues, some Aristotle (maybe the nichomachean [sp?] ethics), and for Modern Philosophy Descartes' meditations, Spinoza (if you're feeling frisky), Berkeley and Hume. Don't try to tackle Kant until you have someone to help you.

If you want to jump into things that are more contemporary and relevant to your field, a great book is Van Fraasen's "The Empirical Stance," and definitely check out the Oxford edition of the Philosophy of Science.

[drudman]

[ QUOTE ]
I've never taken a philosphy course, and I'm taking a year off from school so I figured actually learning something while I'm away would be a good idea. What are some good books to start with to get down some philosophical fundamentals (stuff I'd learn in the first few college courses I suppose)? I'm a phsyics major and reasonably intelligent - I imagine I should pick stuff up pretty quickly but I just don't know where to start.

-SmileyEH

[/ QUOTE ]

Smiley, take "Existentialism" with me at UMass, it's a fun class.

[CallMeIshmael]

Watch some Woody Allen moves, not from the goofy period.


EDIT: This comment isnt 100% joking. Though its close.

[Ragnar]

If you want to give yourself a philosophy course similar to what you would get freshman year in college I'd recommend two books.
An Introduction to Philosophical Analysis by John Hospers and The Art of Reasoning by David Kelley.
These will give you the basics and introduce you to the issues in philosophy and logic.
Then tackle the big boys.
Full disclosure. I work with David Kelley at a philosophy think tank.

[fritzwar]

I wouldn't suggest starting with the history of philosophy. I'd suggest picking up a good contemporary introductory text -- these focus on the *problems* and issues that philosophers are most engaged with (and the range of serious philosophical answers to these problems), rather than focusing on the historical facts about which philosophers said what about these problems. After becoming familiar with a range of central problems in philosophy you can then trace out references to further contemporary and historical work on the problems that most interest you.

For a beginning point, I suggest one or both of *What does it all mean?" (Oxford Univ Press, by T. Nagel) and, no kidding, *Philosophy for Dummies* by my former colleague (now retired) Thomas Morris. This is from the popular for dummies series but mostly he just wrote up his freshman intro course for the book. If I still taught freshmen I'd use this at the University level for sure.

Ted Warfield
Associate Professor of Philosophy
University of Notre Dame

[MarkL444]

get a intro to phil textbook. that should cover a lot of the major areas. then you can decide what you like the most and focus on it.

[SippinSoma]

I got Blackburn's Think and really like it so far.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

Drudman,

With respect, I think this is a pretty sure way to get him not to read about philosophy. Some of these books are fun, many are amongst the most difficult books in the world. Republic alone requires several readings and a sound philosophical base to get much more than a warped political science text. It is, perhaps, the greatest book ever written though.

Here's my guide to philosophical introduction. In order:

1. Early plato (the so-called "socratic Dialogues" because they supposedly only report on Socrates' views and don't further Plato's views (eg. theory of forms)

Every used bookstore has several copies of the title "Five dialogues" since Phil. 101 always requires it. It is good and, like poker, seems very simple at first read yet you could make a career out of analysis of just these dialogues. Rich w/ that which IS philosophy...the questions, not the answers. When you recognize it, you are well on your way. It is best to take Socrates at face value in his bizarro ignorance and think about what it could mean were he to really believe this.

2. Descartes "Meditations"--fairly simple to read, yet rich and very short (approx 60 pages). Foundational to problems that many a dead white guy worried about for centuries. Detailed the obstacle to Knowledge capital K.

3. Now read Republic. You wont really understand it w/o tremendous effort, but it is very "sexy" reading so it is fun and you will get laid at least once if you are able to chat it up at a cocktail party.

4. If you have made it this far, you might want to read some Neitzsche. Fun. Fun. Sexy. This will also help get laid to smart angst ridden women.

5. Wittgenstein. Philosophical investigations. This will never get you laid. Any woman who has read this book will be too smart to have sex w/ any schlepp like you or me. Any that hasn't couldn't care less and those men who have rarely have any charm. It kind of brings philosophy full circle and shows it for the language games that it is.

OK, my books can be difficult also, but not all of them are beyond comprehension on all levels /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
I think Bertrand Russell's 'History of Western Philiosophy' is a very good start to anyone tackling the subject of philosophy. Just take to heart what other posters have said about giving too much credence to any one persons views etc, Russell included. That said, it is a excellent book, in my opinion.


[/ QUOTE ]

This book is fun but very little philosophical content and Russel is so opinionated. His evaluation of philosophers would make it as similar to a volume by Sklansky entitled "The History of Intelligence".

[ QUOTE ]
A Dictionary of Philosophical Quotations, edited by A. J. Ayer and Jane O'Grady.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never seen this book, but it looks to be a great one to leave next to the toilet. Like it or not, much of the best philosophizing is done on the throne in 4 minute sessions. I think I'll pick it up.

PT

[drudman]

Wow, I thought that The Republic was one of the easiest philosophy books I've ever read.

Kant does suck though, but it's not incomprehensible. I know Smiley, and I know philosophy, so I think he's bright enough to not run and hide.

[raisins]

[ QUOTE ]
3. Now read Republic. You wont really understand it w/o tremendous effort, but it is very "sexy" reading so it is fun and you will get laid at least once if you are able to chat it up at a cocktail party.

[/ QUOTE ]

I question this.

If the total number of times that someone chatted up the Republic at a cocktail party was knowable information and the line on the percentage of people getting laid as a result was 5%, I'd bet the under. Easy.

Not the reason to read philosophy.

regards,

raisins

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
If the total number of times that someone chatted up the Republic at a cocktail party was knowable information and the line on the percentage of people getting laid as a result was 5%, I'd bet the under. Easy.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you go to a lot of cocktail parties, a measly 1% edge will get you laid in the long run /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Not the reason to read philosophy.


[/ QUOTE ]

No. Maybe. But being bright has it's advantages

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

[ QUOTE ]
The Republic was one of the easiest philosophy books I've ever read.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but you could spend your life contemplating the allegory of the caves alone and still not quite understand Plato's epistemology.

I think the earlier dialogues are better for the beginner because it is more directly related to philosophical method and the activity of philosophizing.

[ QUOTE ]
Kant does suck though, but it's not incomprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can comprehend the First Critique, I take my hat off to you. If Smiley can take a stab at it, him too. For us mortals, you will need 6-10,000 hours to approach comprehending it.

[Aytumious]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Republic was one of the easiest philosophy books I've ever read.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe, but you could spend your life contemplating the allegory of the caves alone and still not quite understand Plato's epistemology.

I think the earlier dialogues are better for the beginner because it is more directly related to philosophical method and the activity of philosophizing.

[ QUOTE ]
Kant does suck though, but it's not incomprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can comprehend the First Critique, I take my hat off to you. If Smiley can take a stab at it, him too. For us mortals, you will need 6-10,000 hours to approach comprehending it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are overestimating the difficulty in understanding Plato.

Kant, on the other hand, is not so easy on ones own. I might recommend his "Grounding of the Metaphysics of Morals" just to get a taste of what you are up against.

[raisins]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are overestimating the difficulty in understanding Plato.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think so. Plato is as subtle a writer as anyone. There seem to be two schools of interpretation of Plato. One thinks that he has fixed doctrines which are more or less consistent throughout the dialogues but partially explained in any one (e.g. Vlastos) and the other looks at the dialogues as plays where what he says depends on the characters in the dialogues and the occassion (e.g. Strauss). I find the second approach the more compelling by far. Plato is widely acknowledged to be a great writer. Certainly someone with his skill at expression would have chosen to write like Aristotle and pretty much all the philosophers after him if he only wanted to put forward some theories. His choice of form is significant. The dialgoues allow him to indirectly address a complex of significant issues, the dialectic, the erotic nature of questioning and persuasion, and the value of ignorance. I don't think that Plato or Socrates really believed in some "Theory of Forms". I think it is a way to teach about the mind's inherent tendency to generalize and abstract and that this tendency allows for rhetorical techniques that taget it to be used with great effect, as Plato demonstrates in pretty much every dialogue. I doubt if Wittgenstein's discoveries in the Philosophical Investigations would have been any surprise to Plato himself. There's a lot there. Alan Bloom's commentary in his translation of the Republic brings to light a lot of the dramatic features of the dialogue.

After all this thread drift I do have a recommendation for the OP. If you have an interest in Plato check out the translations by R.E. Allen. The elenchic dialogues that I mentioned in my other post are the short earlier ones and some of them are in Allen's first book. There is more to Plato than the Republic. Some of the longer dialogues are very tough, Statesman, Parmenides, Laws, but some of the others are approachable and very rewarding. The Phaedrus, Phaedo and Symposium all have strong dramatic elements that intermesh perfectly with the philosophical themes. Also, check out the seventh letter, it's an easy read, probably genuine, and the best source we have into Plato's life.

regards,

raisins