/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16402284]

Is this worthwhile for the uninitiated?

[Anonymous No.16402293]

No. Just go read some Socratic dialogues, it's not that difficult.

[Anonymous No.16402309]

Yeah he's alright. He seems like a good guy and doesn't really let his biases get in the way of anything. All its good for is giving a quick intro so you can figure whether or not you'd like to read the works though. He definitely doesn't go way into detail, just a basic gestalt.

For the uninitiated, you should probably pick up Gorgias by Plato.

[Anonymous No.16402389]

>>16402284
The episodes are solid in introducing thinkers/ideas you've not concerned yourself with before and he really tries his hardest to explain it as simple as possible which results in a somewhat low information density. I personally like listening to the episodes while doing other things like cleaning, running, etc. If you want something that requires more attention try the hopwag podcast or listen to lectures.

[Anonymous No.16402403]

>>16402389
Lectures is what I want, but I'm not sure which lecturers to focus on. Recs?

[Anonymous No.16402466]

>>16402284
https://plato.stanford.edu/

Use this instead

[Anonymous No.16402498]

Only in conjunction with some original sources/respected commentaries on hand.

And read the original source first, the commentaries second, and listen to this guy last.

He's okay at introducing an idea but most of the time ends up missing the entire point of the philosophy he's discussing. I think it's a result of his university training -- most of his episodes sound like a term paper which is great if your audience is a professor who's judging your understanding but not great when your audience is a student who's trying to learn.

Become your own professor/rely on respected professors and practice critique on guys like philosophize this.

[Anonymous No.16402565]

He is insufferable. His analogies and jokes are so cringe that I gave up after a few episodes and just read this instead.

[Anonymous No.16402590]

>>16402403
Not a big lectures guy, sorry anon. Just try a couple out, there is an abundance of them.

>>16402498
Stephen never underwent a philosophy education. He got all of his knowledge by reading primary and secondary sources.

[Anonymous No.16402605]

https://historyofphilosophy.net/
if you can wait another ten years until he gets catches up with modern philosophy

[Anonymous No.16402666]

>>16402284

Yeah he's decent. It's the best philosophy podcast available but he's not going to get academically in-depth with it. There's too much material to cover. He'd still be on the Greeks, if he did.

[Anonymous No.16402683]

>>16402284
Very casual material, great for beginners who want a very light overview of the history of philosophy, but i can't see the show really convincing anyone towards philosophy that wasn't already inclined towards it. A history of philosophy textbook will give you a much more rigorous exploration, and you're going to want those kind of foundations in philosophy. Highly recommend this too >>16402293

[Anonymous No.16402743]

>>16402284
Great intro if you literally know nothing about philisophy, listen to it in tandem with a general textbook of western philosophy and then read primary sources and commentaries from there to actually comprehend what's happening

[Anonymous No.16402833]

chad melvyn bragg vs. virgin stephen west

[Anonymous No.16403023]

>>16402284
HOLY SHIT I REMEMBER THIS!
he had a episode on the frankfurt school but always stopped talking when things got spicy, cause he didnt want to lose patreon subscribers.
never lost respect on anyone faster.
he said smth like
>ok so we gonna do this topic that had some connection to fasism and the way it is judged today
>i wont take any position but wont judge you dear listeners if you take one
>any way to view any topic is equally correct in some way

literal Enlightent centrist liberal, i fucking hate people like this.

if you spend a decade learning stuff i am usually willing to accept your opinion if you arent rhetorically retarded or tick of some bs flags!

[Anonymous No.16403054]

>>16402565
> A NEW History
I dunno, ever since I started uni back in the day I have been suspicious of everything that markets itself as ' A New x of y' in the liberal arts. Is this any good or is it revisionist garbage like the most?

[Anonymous No.16403058]

as others have said he's fine for an overview. Moreso in terms of podcasts I'd recommend History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps - Peter Adamson is based. I'd also not recommend The Partially Examined Life podcast - those dudes are borderline insufferable to listen to.

so..

1) Listen to Peter Adamson
2) Start with the Greeks
3) Use the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy as well

[Anonymous No.16403087]

>>16403058
Holy based. I came to the exact same regiment myself. But supplemented it with:

4) Read Copleston's History as guide to the primary texts.

I am already on Book3 and it only took something like 5 years, but it has been a joy. I hope I'm gonna make it someday.

[Anonymous No.16403111]

>>16403054
Yeah its decent, discovered it through the /lit/ Philosophy Project as one of the recommended books for an introductory overview https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/pub

[Anonymous No.16403134]

>>16403111
I lurk here for nearly a decade but somehow missed this. Thanks for the link Anon, will check it out.

[Anonymous No.16403819]

>>16403058
>History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps - Peter Adamson
I'm about 90 episodes deep at the moment, I really like it.

[Anonymous No.16403898]

>>16403087
We're all gonna make it!

[Anonymous No.16404670]

he's got a huge hardon for Nietzsche if I recall