4 ms·
One reason to read old philosophy is that it is way more approachable. Most of the time, the approachability is an inverse function of the date the philosophic
by gkya 8y ago
One reason to read old philosophy is that it is way more approachable. Most of the time, the approachability is an inverse function of the date the philosophical material appeared (understandable given our knowledge and thoughts have grown to be more complex throughout history). If you want to get into philosophy, reading a platonic dialogue (except Timaios and those with the Eleian) or one of the simpler texts of Aristotle (like Poetica) is way more easier than say reading Schophenauer, which is in turn easier than Wittgenstein, which in turn is probably easier than reading Derrida. Also, building up on examples of older pieces of philosophy, you have more tools for approaching the new stuff, because, surprise, it's built on not only the concepts, but examples and myths from and references to the old stuff.
And the best thing reading philosophy teaches to the non-academician is how to think with structure and method, avoiding dogma and bias, and embracing scepticism. Reading the dialogues has changed my life entirely because of that.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> One reason to read old philosophy is that it is way more approachable I don't think that's really true in general. Sure, Plato is more approachable than Wittgenstein, but I don't think the comparison works the same with, say, Rawls in place of Wittgenstein.
- imaadrashied 8y ago> "And the best thing reading philosophy teaches to the non-academician is how to think with structure and method, avoiding dogma and bias, and embracing scepticism. Reading the dialogues has changed my life entirely because of that." Completely agree - I find my philosophy degree being most useful in what you've laid out and also in empathizing (or at least understanding) with what someone else is saying, especially if that person is bad at communication or cannot express themselves as clearly as they'd like. The older philosophers tended to take the reader on a mental journey / through a mental exercise, and not always a clear one, so you're forced to extrapolate what's important from what seems to be nonsensical stream of consciousness. I come across folks at work all the time who can't really explain what they're saying, but I'm able to extrapolate based off a few key words / phrases. It's a valuable skill for product discovery / design. Caveat here is that one can develop the above skills without philosophy so it's not a requirement to read old philosophers, but rather one path among many.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]