I highly recommend Plato’s Republic - in it, Socrates sort of touches on a little bit of everything.
Aristotle is also pretty good, mostly because he, unlike Socrates, speaks pretty simply. One of my professors (who has been doing this for upwards of 40 years) says that if you get confused while reading Aristotle, try to figure out the simplest, most face-value possible, and that’s likely what he meant.
(A note on at least the Greeks: Translation makes a huge difference. I don’t know about ‘normal’ book stores, but go into any academic/college bookstore with a philosophy section, and there should be at least two or three different translations of any given work. There can be huge differences between translators, just be aware of that.)
Everybody is different, having their own personal preferences.
IIRC, I always liked Hume and Schopenhauer.
To me, much of philosophical writing is merely repeating what you, the author, said. It’s having an idea, then finding 60+ different ways of saying it. I should probably be banned from making recommendations concerning specific philosophers though. It was my college major, and I always thought it more important that an idea got said/printed instead of remembering who said it.
Hume amused me because he seemed to always be finding the faults with everyone else’s ideas.
And Schopenhauer, well, he too amused me. What was the book??? “Will and Representation” ?? was that it? Some good stuff there, again, IIRC. Boiled down to we are all prisoners of this reality, so we might as well be good to our fellow prisoners. Make it less of a hell. Something like that. But then… in his essays and aphorisms, when he says stuff like women seem to mature more quickly than men, because women are like chickens… if you expect little out of a creature, it reaches apparent maturity faster. :rolleyes: Funny stuff. Funny in its wrong-headedness that is.
I definately agree with this. Although, he is a bit easier than Kant, I think. I have absolutely no idea what made me think that taking a course called Kant and Hegel would be a good idea this semester.
I was also thinking about what I’d reccomended earlier and thought that I would add some more literary stuff than just reading all of these fairly textbook-like books that have been reccommeded. Reading Camus can be a great way to get into existentialism. The Outsider (or The Stranger as it’s also known) is one of my favorite novels, and sparked an interest in existentialism for me (but, I was still a teenager when I read it, so sparking an interest in existentialism wasn’t exatly a difficult task). Also, the play No Exit is a good read (or view, if you go see it performed). This stuff is obviously closely tied to reading Sartre who was certainly an influential philosopher. People often seem to think that a philosophy major should know something about existence and be able to say something clever about it, so some existentialist knowledge never hurts.
Nietzsche is a good philosopher to read as well, I think. I must say that often times I viewed reading his stuff much as I did reading Camus, or in other words, as a literary piece just as much as a philosophical one. He is an interesting writer, and certainly gives you stuff to think about. In general I agree with CBCD in that he’s worth reading and outgrowing, but some of his stuff will surely stick with you in the back of your mind. He had views on a lot of stuff so is pretty good for using as a comparison to other philiosophers and their ideas when your discussing or writing about a philosophical topic.
Ok, that’s it from me. I’m sure that you’ve gotten more than enough reccommendations to keep you busy for a long time in the future neisha. Be careful though, the more you read the more confused you get. I no longer seem to have any clear views on anything.
**Low Key- ** Good call on Camus! His long essay The Myth of Sisyphus is excellent. I re-read it a few years ago and found it far more meaningful than I remembered from my scowling-Sarte-Beckett-Hesse-Kerouac-in-the-back-pocket-on-my-jeans teenager. The Myth of Sisyphus is eloquent and moving. Read the whole thing, not just the summary of the myth itself.
Schopenhauer is my favorite philosopher. Post-Kant but Pre-Neitzche. I’ve always been struck by how his division of the world into “will” and “representation” paralells Asian philosophical views of dualism.
Socrates (through Plato) is a good place to start.
Jumping forward several centuries, try Descartes. David Hume and Bishop Berkeley would be good follow ups. Locke and Hobbes, too.
Kant is like a vast field of deep mud with the most beautiful emeralds and rubies buried in it. It’s a horrible slog but occasionally very well worth it.
Ok, so I lied when I said that would be it from me in my last post. I just had to second the Descartes reccommendation. I can’t believe this wasn’t one of the first philosophers mentioned in this thread. Read his Meditations. Everyone knows the line “I think, therefore I am.” This is where it’s from. He essentially started philosophers down the road of scepticism. A fairly easy to understand piece as well. You get to read a sort of ‘diary of a great thinker’.
Hobbes’ Leviathan is another key piece in modern philosophy. It’s another great work of philosophy that will get you thinking.
Maybe that’s it from me now - I should probably be reading this stuff now instead of writing about it. I mean who wouldn’t be looking forward to an evening of reading Hegel?
Start with Descartes - that’s where modern Western philosophy begins.
Most of what comes later is at its heart a response to Descartes.
Then read Kant - yes, it’s a slog, but nothing worthwhile in life is easy.
No other thinker gets near Kant and it should be on everyone’s reading list.
If you’re interested in the way philosophy and society interact I’d suggest Isaiah Berlin’s “Crooked Timber of Humanity”. It has one of the most accessible discussions of pluraism and the quest for absolute value I’ve come across.
and not with the pre-socratics? I see western philosophy beginning in Greece, going to Rome, then taken over by the Catholic Church until basically the Renaissance or even arguably the Enlightment period. To me, it’s one big dialogue and Rene is just one voice, albeit an important one. I think you can argue that there voices in each age that really challenge future ages, ie. Plato, Aristotle, Nietzsche, et cetera.
I think this book would be helpful to anyone without a philosophical background. Russell is an excellent writer, but he’s very opinionated and doesn’t even try to respect points of view he disagrees with. So I wouldn’t start with him unless you already know enough philosophy to know when to say “give it a rest, Bertrand.”
Reading the originals is always good. I agree with everything Ninjachick said, but I’m probably biased since I went through the same training she’s going through now at SJC. Having a community to read the great thinkers with is very helpful as they can be pretty daunting. You can’t go wrong with Plato. Don.t start with the Phaedo though.
