Russell took one idea–that philosophy is nothing but the conceptual analysis of logical content in Fregean terms–and then evaluates the history of philosophy according to how well he thinks its ideas approximate this conception, without articulating any real understanding of the ideas themselves. The book is one long advertisement for logical positivism. By mid-century, logical positivism as a complete bust, itself a vestige of religious thinking–in the form of the mythos of the logos.
One possibility is to spend a lot of time with the Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Buy a set, if you can. You can approach it any way you want: thematically, historically, haphazardly. Think of it as a philosophic library in itself, through which you can wander in any fashion you choose. The encyclopedia format makes cross-referencing useful and fun. Further, the articles are written by many contributors, not just one. You get scope, depth and diversity of ideas.
Do you understand him? E.g., what exactly does he mean by “will to power” – power over others, or power to get things done, or something else entirely?
I too would be interested in hearing our philosopher Dopers’ recommendations for good books on philosophy.
It’s been a long time since I read it, but Will Durant’s The Story of Philosophy seems pretty good, albeit incomplete and not modern.
Sophie’s World is an attempt to put philosophy and its history into the form of a novel and make it accessible to younger readers. I found it interesting, but I’d be interested in hearing a professional philosopher’s opinion.
The Teaching Company (The Great Courses) and The Modern Scholar both have some good lecture series on philosophy (some general, some more specific).
All of the above. Every event is a will to power. Life is a will to power of its own. Human life is the life of a linguistic herd animal that is distinguished ultimately not by its “rationality,” but by its aesthetic capacity–principally, to create culture and its values. The flourishing of human power is the flourishing of culture. The norms of “rationality” are but expressions of value preference.
How is any form of power an aesthetic matter?! The artist’s power to create is, certainly, but I can think of no other. E.g., the engineer’s power to create is not.
Again, aesthetics is the flourishing of human life, and so it is the ultimate expression of human power. It is the flourishing of human life because it is the sublimation of human suffering and struggle. Yes, Freud gets this idea from Nietzsche.
Well, I think if you asked most college-educated people to name the philosopher who first “taught us to think,” the first name to mind would be Socrates or Plato, not Aristotle. (A philosophy major might give a different answer.)
No, but generalized Cartesian Doubt is still a very relevant matter, as seen, for instance, in the form of “Last Thursday-ism.” (“The universe was created last Thursday, including all of our – artificial – memories of previous times.” Earlier seen in Gosse’s “Omphalos” hypothesis.)
It’s a great koan, along with the tree falling in the forest or God creating a weight he can’t lift. “How do we know this isn’t all a dream?”
Descartes’ answer sucks, but the question is brilliant.
ETA:
I’ll politely disagree. (Perhaps he is wholly underrated by philosophy professors?)
IANAP, but this, to me, is why Nietzsche is so important not just in philosophy but for the whole post-modern era. IMO he pretty much de-throned rationalism as a singular guiding principle of ethics, society, culture, etc. Agree or disagree, he is a major figure worth at least approaching in order to understand our post-modern world.
As for books on the current “relevance” of various philosophers, I’d recommend Luc Ferry’s A Breif History of Thought. Like njtt, I think all philosophers have something to contribute, but this is a good summary mainly because it focuses more on movements than individual philosphers (with the exception of Nietzsche) and thus allows a reader to find ideas/philosophers they may want to explore more deeply.