7 ms·

Relatedly, if anyone is looking to get started with philosophy, Crash Course has a fantastic video series on it: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaL

Relatedly, if anyone is looking to get started with philosophy, Crash Course has a fantastic video series on it: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdY...

brudgers 7y ago
Another approach is just listening to what philosophers are thinking. The Philosophy Bites podcast catalog is great for that. https://philosophybites.com/ https://philosophybites.com/
- pmoriarty 7y ago
  Another excellent philosophy podcast is The Partially Examined Life: https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/ https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/
  - xtiansimon 7y ago
    I’ve listened to every episode since they were recommended on Slate Culture Gabfest in 2014
- lbotos 7y ago
  I enjoyed http://philosophizethis.org/ http://philosophizethis.org/ for another option!
  - jakobloekke 7y ago
    Me too. This is one of my favourite podcasts.
bananamerica 7y ago
Another approach is reading a few articles from https://www.iep.utm.edu/ https://www.iep.utm.edu/ and http://plato.stanford.edu/ http://plato.stanford.edu/ But IMHO the best course of action would be to acquire logic proficiency first. And no, I'm not talking about the logic programmers usually know, but rather formal and informal philosophical logic. Proficiency in logic is to philosophy like reading sheet music is to music. You can get by without it, but it will help you immensely.
- rhizome 7y ago
  "A few articles?" This is what discoverability looks like on both of those sites: https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html. Just start at "A"? I think non-academic people like me are served perfectly well by reading Spinoza's Ethics. Googling for more from there will cover almost all of post-dualism Western phil.
  - tyre 7y ago
    yeah encyclopedias don't provide any guidance. Wikipedia actually does a pretty good job of this. They have a section on the side bar for "Influences" (who influenced this philosopher and "Influenced" (who this philosopher influenced.) Aristotle has this epic entry: Influences: Plato Influenced: Virtually all subsequent Western philosophy, Christian philosophy and pre-Enlightenment science (see List of writers influenced by Aristotle) When I was in my first Philosophy seminar, our professor started off by saying, "all of western philosophy is a footnote to Aristotle." He was a real one. You could also google for philosophy course syllabi, but it's not always easy to know _why_ one philosopher influenced another or the significance in political theory, ethics, etc.
    - ezequiel-garzon 7y ago
      Did your professor point to Whitehead’s original quote? “So far as concerns philosophy only a selected group can be explicitly mentioned. There is no point in endeavouring to force the interpretations of divergent philosophers into a vague agreement. What is important is that the scheme of interpretation here adopted can claim for each of its main positions the express authority of one, or the other, of some supreme master of thought - Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant. But ultimately nothing rests on authority; the final court of appeal is intrinsic reasonableness. The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. I do not mean the systematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extracted from his writings. I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered through them. His personal endowments, his wide opportunities for experience at a great period of civilization, his inheritance of an intellectual tradition not yet stiffened by excessive systematization, have made his writing an inexhaustible mine of suggestion.” https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/footnotes_plato.html https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/footnotes_plato.h...
tieze 7y ago
If you just have ears, History of Philosophy without any gaps is great podcast: https://historyofphilosophy.net/ https://historyofphilosophy.net/. Great and thorough companion when I do the dishes.
- dorchadas 7y ago
  And, if you'd rather read, he's also got a book series to go along with it. Volume 5 (on philosophy in ancient India) is set to be published later this year.
claudiawerner 7y ago
I hate to be a downer, but there are good reasons[0] to avoid getting your starting ideas from the Crash Course series of videos. I think a better approach would be either to (1) start actually reading Descartes or Plato, or (2) use the Crash Course video titles as to what you should be looking up on SEP. Similarly, a lot of introductory text on many important philosophers is off the mark; Peter Singer's Marx in the "Short Introduction to" series is known to be pretty poor, for example. Please try and rely on expert resources, and not just people who are experts in some other area, or even sometimes in another area of philosophy. Experts on philosophy are just as capable as anyone else skilled in an area to explain ideas without too much jargon (or if there is, explanations of it!) Some philosophers you can start reading primary material. For others it's more difficult. University textbooks should also be worth considering, at least. But the Crash Course videos may be the wrong approach. If you're looking for videos, I'd recommend Wireless Philosophy pretty much always. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/4de95h/why_does_rbadphilosophy_hate_crash_course/ https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/4de95h/why_d...

brudgers 7y ago

Another approach is just listening to what philosophers are thinking. The Philosophy Bites podcast catalog is great for that. https://philosophybites.com/ https://philosophybites.com/

pmoriarty 7y ago
Another excellent philosophy podcast is The Partially Examined Life: https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/ https://partiallyexaminedlife.com/
- xtiansimon 7y ago
  I’ve listened to every episode since they were recommended on Slate Culture Gabfest in 2014
lbotos 7y ago
I enjoyed http://philosophizethis.org/ http://philosophizethis.org/ for another option!
- jakobloekke 7y ago
  Me too. This is one of my favourite podcasts.

bananamerica 7y ago

Another approach is reading a few articles from https://www.iep.utm.edu/ https://www.iep.utm.edu/ and http://plato.stanford.edu/ http://plato.stanford.edu/ But IMHO the best course of action would be to acquire logic proficiency first. And no, I'm not talking about the logic programmers usually know, but rather formal and informal philosophical logic. Proficiency in logic is to philosophy like reading sheet music is to music. You can get by without it, but it will help you immensely.

rhizome 7y ago
"A few articles?" This is what discoverability looks like on both of those sites: https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html. Just start at "A"? I think non-academic people like me are served perfectly well by reading Spinoza's Ethics. Googling for more from there will cover almost all of post-dualism Western phil.
- tyre 7y ago
  yeah encyclopedias don't provide any guidance. Wikipedia actually does a pretty good job of this. They have a section on the side bar for "Influences" (who influenced this philosopher and "Influenced" (who this philosopher influenced.) Aristotle has this epic entry: Influences: Plato Influenced: Virtually all subsequent Western philosophy, Christian philosophy and pre-Enlightenment science (see List of writers influenced by Aristotle) When I was in my first Philosophy seminar, our professor started off by saying, "all of western philosophy is a footnote to Aristotle." He was a real one. You could also google for philosophy course syllabi, but it's not always easy to know _why_ one philosopher influenced another or the significance in political theory, ethics, etc.
  - ezequiel-garzon 7y ago
    Did your professor point to Whitehead’s original quote? “So far as concerns philosophy only a selected group can be explicitly mentioned. There is no point in endeavouring to force the interpretations of divergent philosophers into a vague agreement. What is important is that the scheme of interpretation here adopted can claim for each of its main positions the express authority of one, or the other, of some supreme master of thought - Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant. But ultimately nothing rests on authority; the final court of appeal is intrinsic reasonableness. The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato. I do not mean the systematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extracted from his writings. I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered through them. His personal endowments, his wide opportunities for experience at a great period of civilization, his inheritance of an intellectual tradition not yet stiffened by excessive systematization, have made his writing an inexhaustible mine of suggestion.” https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/footnotes_plato.html https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/footnotes_plato.h...

tieze 7y ago

If you just have ears, History of Philosophy without any gaps is great podcast: https://historyofphilosophy.net/ https://historyofphilosophy.net/. Great and thorough companion when I do the dishes.

dorchadas 7y ago
And, if you'd rather read, he's also got a book series to go along with it. Volume 5 (on philosophy in ancient India) is set to be published later this year.

claudiawerner 7y ago

I hate to be a downer, but there are good reasons[0] to avoid getting your starting ideas from the Crash Course series of videos. I think a better approach would be either to (1) start actually reading Descartes or Plato, or (2) use the Crash Course video titles as to what you should be looking up on SEP. Similarly, a lot of introductory text on many important philosophers is off the mark; Peter Singer's Marx in the "Short Introduction to" series is known to be pretty poor, for example. Please try and rely on expert resources, and not just people who are experts in some other area, or even sometimes in another area of philosophy. Experts on philosophy are just as capable as anyone else skilled in an area to explain ideas without too much jargon (or if there is, explanations of it!) Some philosophers you can start reading primary material. For others it's more difficult. University textbooks should also be worth considering, at least. But the Crash Course videos may be the wrong approach. If you're looking for videos, I'd recommend Wireless Philosophy pretty much always. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/4de95h/why_does_rbadphilosophy_hate_crash_course/ https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/4de95h/why_d...