3 ms·

It's an interesting argument. Without having read e.g. Plato's Republic myself, is the novice likely to learn as much or more from reading a direct translation

by n4r9 6y ago

It's an interesting argument. Without having read e.g. Plato's Republic myself, is the novice likely to learn as much or more from reading a direct translation as they are from its Wikipedia page and some commentaries?

msla 6y ago
I read Plato's Republic a long time ago now and, both from my memory and looking at translations online just now, it's approachable and comprehensible. Project Gutenberg has the Jowett translation: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm ... and what little I could see of the C.D.C. Reeve translation at Amazon looked very approachable: https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Hackett-Classics-Plato/dp/0872207366 https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Hackett-Classics-Plato/dp/08...
snakeboy 6y ago
I would argue yes, at least for Plato in particular, the commentaries take their time to discuss the topics in the so-called "Socratic" style, and its easy to engage with the arguments and counter-arguments directly. I think with a commentary you risk reading someone else's opinion, without challenging yourself to form your own. It's more-or-less equivalent to doing the exercises in a math text rather than just reading the chapters and letting the author convince you that you understand. Obviously the ideal is the read the source material and then read commentaries after once you've had a chance to reflect on it for yourself. Of course for me, I have only ever managed to read Plato and Karl Popper. Other "Classics" like Hume or Kant I can't make heads of tails of the source material without some guidance. I haven't even tried the most notoriously dense authors like Nietsche or Hegel.
davidvaughan 6y ago
The novice is less likely to learn from a direct reading of Plato's Republic than to absorb Socrates's arguments and ingest enormous amounts of food for thought. The novice will then have the capacity to think more seriously about current or historical political questions and devise better responses or approaches to them (better for the novice and better for our societies). Always go to the masters first - the Platos, the Keynes, the Freuds... They're by far the best exponents of their own thinking.

by n4r9 6y ago

msla 6y ago

I read Plato's Republic a long time ago now and, both from my memory and looking at translations online just now, it's approachable and comprehensible. Project Gutenberg has the Jowett translation: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm https://www.gutenberg.org/files/55201/55201-h/55201-h.htm ... and what little I could see of the C.D.C. Reeve translation at Amazon looked very approachable: https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Hackett-Classics-Plato/dp/0872207366 https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Hackett-Classics-Plato/dp/08...

snakeboy 6y ago

I would argue yes, at least for Plato in particular, the commentaries take their time to discuss the topics in the so-called "Socratic" style, and its easy to engage with the arguments and counter-arguments directly. I think with a commentary you risk reading someone else's opinion, without challenging yourself to form your own. It's more-or-less equivalent to doing the exercises in a math text rather than just reading the chapters and letting the author convince you that you understand. Obviously the ideal is the read the source material and then read commentaries after once you've had a chance to reflect on it for yourself. Of course for me, I have only ever managed to read Plato and Karl Popper. Other "Classics" like Hume or Kant I can't make heads of tails of the source material without some guidance. I haven't even tried the most notoriously dense authors like Nietsche or Hegel.

davidvaughan 6y ago

The novice is less likely to learn from a direct reading of Plato's Republic than to absorb Socrates's arguments and ingest enormous amounts of food for thought. The novice will then have the capacity to think more seriously about current or historical political questions and devise better responses or approaches to them (better for the novice and better for our societies). Always go to the masters first - the Platos, the Keynes, the Freuds... They're by far the best exponents of their own thinking.