Philosophy (1 Viewer)

[Tommy_Lamp]

Does anyone here read any philosophy books?

atm im reading Ethics by Aristotle, i find them really interesting.
a good starting book for someone interested is "The Best Things in Life" by Peter Kreeft

 

[christ_ine]

The closest I've come to reading a book that has anything to do with philosophy was Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder.

 

[|Axis_]

i was flicking through a philosophy book in the library the other day. there was some interesting stuff on rationalism and Descartes.. apparently studying maths will deepen your perspective on reality, truth and perception..

then there were the people who diputed rationalist philosophy, claiming that Euclidean geometry was NOT the only true system of geometry! they claimed that entirely different and stable mathematical systems could be developed, if only we changed our single belief that: there is only one parallel line through any point.

"I think, therefore I am" - Descartes. he reasoned that: How can you know that you exist? Is there really an external world around you, or is it in your mind? Is it really substance? Suppose you actually don't exist. Try to rationalise that statement. If you indeed manage to, the paradox is that the moment you began to think, you already proved you exist.

well, thats what i skimmed thru in 5 mins

 

[Tommy_Lamp]

Thats an awesome book, i recommend you read his other books aswell

umm.. Through a Glass, Darkly..The Christmas Mystery and The Solitaire Mystery

there are more but there the ones i have read



jaxis, i might check that out

 

[CaR]

The only one I've read was "Watching The Tree to Catch a Hare" by Adeline Yen Mah, the author of Chinese Cinderalla and Falling Leaves.

I found the book on my parents bookshelf and so I decided to read it. It was ok, but i hardly do read philosophy books

 

[walrusbear]

does camus count?
i've read the outsider

and a couple of sartre plays that weren't remarkable

 

[Prometheus]

Presently reading "The Gay Science" (Nothing to do with homosexuality, I should add) by Friedrich Nietzsche. I can hardly begin to summarise the whys and hows that make this book, and the author so awesome, and significant to the modern reader. Nietzsche confronts the issues that others would rather remain ignorant of, and tries to detach himself of all traditional dogma. Furthermore, through his keen observation, he predicted the direction of mankind, the problems he sees affecting future humanity are applicable to us, now. You're likely to get me in rant-mode by bringing up philosophy, so I'll leave it here for the moment. In addition to Nietzsche, I'm also a fan of Schopenhauer, Kant, Hume, Hegel and Robert Anton Wilson.

 

[AsyLum]

reading the penguin history of western philosophy, before then startin hesiod's theogany.

*sigh*

Bye

 

[Sarah168]

I've had Sophie's World reccomended to me as a starter but I never got around to it. I bought a copy of Nietzsche's "Beyond Good and Evil" a few weeks ago and I like what I read lol

 

[miss_salty]

perhaps not quite philosophy, but the absurdist works of beckett, camus and satre are interesting.
generally, i find philosophy rather annoying - and not because i dont understand it or feel threatened by it. i think its intellectual pretentious (not that im discrediting the intelligence of nietzsche, descartes etc) to sit and ask "why?" and "what?"

 

[MoNNiE]

read confuious!

 

[Zarathustra]

perhaps not quite philosophy, but the absurdist works of beckett, camus and satre are interesting.
generally, i find philosophy rather annoying - and not because i dont understand it or feel threatened by it. i think its intellectual pretentious (not that im discrediting the intelligence of nietzsche, descartes etc) to sit and ask "why?" and "what?"

What's wrong with asking why? I agree that Nietzsche is at times (intentionally) offensive but I can't quite understand your objection to philosophy as a discipline. If someone decides to spend their life 'navel-gazing' I hardly see how that affects you - still each to their own...

 

[AsyLum]

perhaps not quite philosophy, but the absurdist works of beckett, camus and satre are interesting.
generally, i find philosophy rather annoying - and not because i dont understand it or feel threatened by it. i think its intellectual pretentious (not that im discrediting the intelligence of nietzsche, descartes etc) to sit and ask "why?" and "what?"

It is an intellectual pretentiousness, there is no two ways about it. To be a philosopher you truly have to be pretentious, or else how would one find the drive and will to spend a lifetime thinking and trying to prove themselves right or to search for that meaning within life.

As with all culture, it is a want, more than a need

Humans do not need to know where they came from to survive, but there is a want and urge to.

 

[Prometheus]

It is an intellectual pretentiousness, there is no two ways about it. To be a philosopher you truly have to be pretentious, or else how would one find the drive and will to spend a lifetime thinking and trying to prove themselves right or to search for that meaning within life.

From this stance, I think you could argue a lot of disciplines are pretentious. At the same time, I don't think all philosophers have wanted to prove themselves right to others (only to find what is right for themselves) nor do they all want to find "meaning in life" in the traditional way that phrase is used - see particularly skepicism and discordianism... even Buddhism, if you can consider that a philosophy.

Anyway, I guess I'm straying off topic.

 

[miss_salty]

It is an intellectual pretentiousness, there is no two ways about it. To be a philosopher you truly have to be pretentious, or else how would one find the drive and will to spend a lifetime thinking and trying to prove themselves right or to search for that meaning within life.

As with all culture, it is a want, more than a need

Humans do not need to know where they came from to survive, but there is a want and urge to.

no doubt people would want to find the meaning of life but philosophy only offers questions not answers (well the answers they give arent necessarily life changing) and im pretty sure everyone asks these questions some stage of their life . . . so why are philosphers valourised as intellectuals?

and zarathustra . . .
no im not offended by any philospher (i would be more interested if it was)
i dont object to the discipline of philosophy but rather, some aspects of philosophy irritates me because it is taken so seriously *in a deep serious wise voice from the matrix* What if this was not real? How do you tell the difference between the dream world and the real world? and blah blah
and you cant argue that it is intellectually pretentious. . . and that's all i dislike about it.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

no doubt people would want to find the meaning of life but philosophy only offers questions not answers (well the answers they give arent necessarily life changing) and im pretty sure everyone asks these questions some stage of their life . . . so why are philosphers valourised as intellectuals?

True, the questions posed by philosophy may never be answered, but its value lies in this very questioning.