I'd Like To Study Philosophy Independently

[Ice_nine]

Information overload!

maybe I'll just do social media studies instead

[Kia ora]

I think the best advice I can give you is to read stuff that you're interested in. If you have no interest in Plato or Aristotle, then don't force yourself to trudge through them. I can't think of anything worse than reading philosophy because you feel you have to.

[Ice_nine]

well the issue comes down to . . . I think the philosophical systems of the modern and post-modern world are fudged up. So I look and say hmm, how did we get here? And then some key thinkers of the enlightenment come up, decartes, kant etc. And so I go hmmm, how did THEY get there, and so on and so on.

But working backwards with my cursory knowledge of the subject is confusing because before I can mull over the writings of the philosophers and commentaries on them I have to understand what context they were in and stuff. Sometimes the commentaries help with this context but it piques my curiosity and I want to have a more complete understanding.

So I don't feel like I have to in one sense, but in another I feel as though it will really aid me in understanding how we got to where we are today.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1328118966' post='2379005']
well the issue comes down to . . . I think the philosophical systems of the modern and post-modern world are fudged up. So I look and say hmm, how did we get here? And then some key thinkers of the enlightenment come up, decartes, kant etc. And so I go hmmm, how did THEY get there, and so on and so on.

But working backwards with my cursory knowledge of the subject is confusing because before I can mull over the writings of the philosophers and commentaries on them I have to understand what context they were in and stuff. Sometimes the commentaries help with this context but it piques my curiosity and I want to have a more complete understanding.

So I don't feel like I have to in one sense, but in another I feel as though it will really aid me in understanding how we got to where we are today.
[/quote]I'd say read Francis Bacon's works, but you have to read some Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas first.

[Laudate_Dominum]

You could be all edgy and razzle dazzle and start with Nietzsche.

[url="http://www.amazon.com/Writings-Nietzsche-Modern-Library-Classics/dp/0679783393/"]http://www.amazon.com/Writings-Nietzsche-Modern-Library-Classics/dp/0679783393/[/url]

[Amppax]

In a perfect world, I'd be a philosophy major. Alas, being a philosophy major seems less conducive to guaranteeing future paychecks than being a theology major.

[qfnol31]

It really depends. A philosophy major can easily go on to study anything in graduate school, especially theology. My wife always told me I was better prepared for graduate school than she was. It really depends on what you want to do in life.

My doctor even told me he wished he had been a philosophy major in undergraduate. His BS degree didn't really help him.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1328237461' post='2379959']
In a perfect world, I'd be a philosophy major. Alas, being a philosophy major seems less conducive to guaranteeing future paychecks than being a theology major.
[/quote]
Why not both? I actually majored in theology, but if I had it to do over, I'd pick philosophy. On the side I'd just take courses of interest and skip what wasn't helpful. I suppose it depends on the school and the program.

[arfink]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1328237461' post='2379959']
In a perfect world, I'd be a philosophy major. Alas, being a philosophy major seems less conducive to guaranteeing future paychecks than being a theology major.
[/quote]

Amp- I may rag on the practical worthlessness of my philosophy degree alot, but I will say this: I absolutely loved studying philosophy, and I would probably do it again, though in hindsight I'd put some comp-sci on the side.

[Amppax]

Well, I suppose that I should explain. My ultimate goal is to teach high school history and/or theology, and so those are my majors. I'm going to have the opportunity to leave after 4 years with both my bachelors and a masters in theology, and so adding philosophy to the mix really didn't seem to be the best decision. Additionally, the great books program I'm in covers a lot of philosophy, so I'm still studying a lot of philosophy. I suppose I should have said that in a perfect world I'd be able to study the philosophy in addition to these other things. The philosophy classes I've taken (2 classes so far) are probably my favorite classes I've taken.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Amppax

[Era Might]

There's a 9 volume history of philosophy by a Jesuit named Frederick Copleston, S.J.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Era Might

[arfink]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1328290732' post='2380401']
There's a 9 volume history of philosophy by a Jesuit named Frederick Copleston, S.J.
[/quote]

Yeah, but trying to get through that without help will damage your brain about as much as dropping all 9 volumes onto your face from a height. Owch.

Edited February 3, 2012 by arfink

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Era Might' timestamp='1328290732' post='2380401']
There's a 9 volume history of philosophy by a Jesuit named Frederick Copleston, S.J.
[/quote]
I love Copleton and mentioned those volumes on the previous page, but I'd recommend it with reservations. I would say that W. T. Jones is more accessible to modern students. Copleston is old school and this might be discouraging to some. For example, Copleston assumes that his reader is comfortable enough with languages that he can quote original texts without translation, which would have been true back in his day.

[Amppax]

This thread must not die!

And also, [i]The Republic [/i]is pretty razzle dazzle. I just wish it was shorter

[4588686]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1328305562' post='2380551']
I love Copleton and mentioned those volumes on the previous page, but I'd recommend it with reservations. I would say that W. T. Jones is more accessible to modern students. Copleston is old school and this might be discouraging to some. For example, Copleston assumes that his reader is comfortable enough with languages that he can quote original texts without translation, which would have been true back in his day.
[/quote]

Yeah. And it's not just quotes. I mean as I recall, granted I haven't read the first volume since 11th grade so this could be totally off, he doesn't even provide summations of the passage. Like I seem to recall 'As Aristotle notes: paragraph of Attic Greek'

But as I recall it was really well done and I don't remember too many things like that. I didn't read past the first Volume (which I lent to a Swiss exchange student and was never given it back) but in skimming through the more moderns I remember being somewhat disappointed with his selection. But it seems like a great overview overall.