/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10701094]

Aside from pic related, what are some trustworthy online sources for philosophy?

[Anonymous No.10701104]

>>10701094
Internet Encyclopia of Philosophy (IEP) is very good in my opinion.

https://www.iep.utm.edu

[Anonymous No.10701111]

>>10701104
have only ever fucked with SEP, has anyone ever read articles for same thing in both and preferred IEP? what are the typical differences

[Anonymous No.10701119]

>>10701111
I never used SEP, but I used IEP for my classes on philosophy of the law when I was in law college and my teacher seemed to dont mind.
That said, my country has shit uni's, so if you are in first world countrys, using IEP may not be as okay as in my country.

[Anonymous No.10701120]

>>10701094
>>10701104
>>10701111
The are both good resources. The share the same problem, though, the endogamic academy. They only quote recent studies and they have a very narrow point of view, but kind of undisputed points, so it's reliable.

[Anonymous No.10701130]

>>10701111
IEP tends to be less rigorous, but unlike SEP it covers topics which are outside the sphere of analytic philosophy. There are poor articles on both, however, it really depends on the academic.

[Anonymous No.10701139]

>>10701120
Fair point. Tho if you are writting academicaly, Academy likes sources they find thurstworth, and in general, IEP seemed to be a very in deeph source in several fields of philosophy.

[Anonymous No.10701145]

>>10701130
i email SEP once in a while if something is terrible, theyre pretty responsive

[Anonymous No.10701150]

>>10701145
You must be fun at parties.

[Anonymous No.10701447]

>>10701150
I would definitely party with him.
I bet he takes bites off of blotter sheets and continually rotates between whippets and hash bowls. Dude just sets there with his mouth open.

[Anonymous No.10701836]

>>10701130
SEP has a bunch of non-analytic stuff too

[Anonymous No.10701882]

[Anonymous No.10701900]

>>10701882
>tfw ywn be saddled by the sadler

[Anonymous No.10701915]

>>10701104
>>10701111
Iep is awful

[Anonymous No.10701985]

>>10701111
If I don't find a thinker or topic on SEP I look for him in the IEP. Some articles on IEP I've found easier, but it depends entirely on who's writing them.

Acquainting yourself with the history of philosophy is better than randomly jumping from encyclopedia article to another as per the Wikipedia® School of Pedagogy™. Histories of philosophy have been written by Magee, Durant, Kenny as shorter works, and Copleston as a sizable 11-volume one.

Magee also has an '87 TV series on the history of philosophy, The Great Philosophers, where he interviewed scholars and philosophers that are of relevance in the current year, I wish the stuff he and Putnam talked about was common knowledge among 21st century folks:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFF9E7ADD88FBA144
This self-explanatory website covers less known thinkers in addition to the usual suspects: http://www.historyofphilosophy.net/
Rick Roderick is a very good lecturer with a historical series on human values (i.e. a short course on ethics from Socrates to postmodernity), one on Nietzsche alone and one on Continental philosophy from Heidegger onwards: http://rickroderick.org/
Gregory B. Sadler is another good lecturer that specializes on ethics, Stoics, Aristotle, Cicero, etc. and continental philosophy, including his endless Half Hour Hegel series: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEtxsMx4qsoitFwjBdLU_gA
Partially Examined life is a podcast on a little bit of everything: http://www.partiallyexaminedlife.com

[Anonymous No.10702017]

>>10701150
Woah! What encyclopedia of pseud platitudes did you dig that one out of?

[Anonymous No.10702047]

>>10702017
I mailed to one.

[Anonymous No.10702055]

>>10701094
That guy on the logo looks like he's taking a shit outside.

[Anonymous No.10702269]

>>10701094
not this: http://www.informationphilosopher.com/

[Anonymous No.10702345]

>>10701094
>SEP
long rundown
>>10701104
>IEP
quick rundown

[Anonymous No.10702354]

>>10701094
Wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.10702371]

I usually go to see if there's an aphorism in orgy of the will about whatever I'm looking for

[Anonymous No.10703195]

I don't even bother reading primary texts anymore, SEP and Wikipedia is all I use .

[Anonymous No.10703241]

>>10701094
>>10701104
SEP and IEP are the only online resources that I used more than just a few times. However their articles are written from more or less an analytical or Anglo-saxon approach.
When it comes to getting acquainted with a certain thinker I suggest finding some important essay they've written. You always gain much more from reading primary sources. In most cases I use SEP and IEP only when I can't be bothered to have more than a very shallow understanding of some thinker.

>>10703195
At least avoid Wikipedia, most of the philosophy articles seem to be written by American undergrads who also never read primary sources.

[Anonymous No.10703285]

>>10703241
what are primary sources?

[Anonymous No.10703333]

>>10703285
Aristotle's Physics - primary source
"A very short introduction to Aristotelian natural philosophy" - secondary source

[Anonymous No.10703367]

>>10703333
What does irony mean?

[Anonymous No.10703424]

>>10703285
What the thinker in question has written. The problem with reading only secondary sources is not only that it's twice removed (you're reading someone else's reading) but that even good scholars disagree on what is a crucial aspect of that thinker. Whereas by reading the primary sources you see all the nuances and subtlety of their thought.
It's happened to me more than once that I dismissed someone based on popular interpretation. Then much later I decided to read them for some completely different reason and found out that I misjudged them.

[Anonymous No.10703453]

I guess we can conclude that autism is a plague around here.

[Anonymous No.10703615]

>>10703367
it's something that faggots use over the internet as a psychological defence mechanism