Introduction to philosophy

[Anonymous No.17641458]

Is this a good place to start? Heard mixed opinions on it.
>Inb4 Just start with the Greeks
I do plan to get into Plato and Aristotle's work individually. But I dont care much about the rest of olive branch fuckers. Just need need a base to wider understanding

[Anonymous No.17641515]

read it and find out yourself

[Anonymous No.17641629]

>>17641515
It's big and I don't want to waste my time

[Anonymous No.17641665]

life is too short to be wasted on reading anglos

[Anonymous No.17641812]

>>17641629
then stop reading it if you think it's a waste of time for you.

[Anonymous No.17641847]

Decent introduction. I would recommend reading it and then Will Durants. Really you only get a surface level coverage of who he deems to be important. For any actually understanding you want to interact with the primary sources yourself. If you have no philosophical background it’s a decent start to find some people you are interested in. The problems of philosophy is another good starting point by Russell

[Anonymous No.17641922]

>>17641458
Why not read original sources? Plato is accessible enough for everyone. Aristotle’s a little harder, but if you’re interested enough in ancient he’s still doable with secondary lit. What are your interests? Any fields or eras you like? Hone in on that, don’t bother with a survey

[Anonymous No.17641941]

Get this

[Anonymous No.17641989]

>>17641922
I do plan on reading the original sources. But for now I am looking for a buffer covering philosophical movements in a more broader strokes, as in Heraclitus and such too. I cba too pick each one of them individually and would only dwell on the sources of the more important ones.

[Anonymous No.17642014]

>>17641458
Russel's history of philosophy sucks if you're a new to the field. Start with these:
>Plato
>Aristotle
>Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy
>Anthony Kenny's history of western philosophy

You'll thank me later.

[Anonymous No.17642047]

I started with it, and I don't regret. However, he's a bit opinionated sometimes, and he's very influenced by the current historical circumstances. Don't take his word for truth when he starts "analyzing" stuff.

[Anonymous No.17642050]

>>17641458
This book received an impressive amount of criticism when it came out. Russell strawmans a lot of philosophers, and omits pretty important ones. He's clearly trying to write the history of philosophy to make it seem like his brand of analytic philosophy is the natural continuation of it. I'd say start with anything but this.

[Anonymous No.17642053]

>>17641458
>Is this a good place to start?

Is this a joke? Do you respect Bertrand Russell?

[Anonymous No.17642232]

Thoughts on these /lit/?

Worth reading?

[Anonymous No.17642244]

>>17641458
it's just polemic, if you want a neutral summary of western philosophy try the stanford encyclopedia or (god forbid) wikipedia. russell had a major axe to grind

[Anonymous No.17642283]

>>17642232
Read them and find out

[Anonymous No.17642323]

>>17641458
Google says Russel biased and this book by Kenny is way better.

[Anonymous No.17642694]

>>17642232
The Philosophy Book is unironically based.

>>17642323
Google is correct. Russel glosses over some highly influential philosophers like Hegel and mostly explores ideas related to logic and mathematics rather than, for example, metaphysics or ethics. Russel also inserted a lot of opinions in the book. Kenny gives a more balanced account, in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.17642700]

>>17642232

>The Philosophy Book
>A history of important philosophical ideas
>Randomly skips a millennium for some reason

[Anonymous No.17642701]

>>17641458
extremely biased but useful nonetheless. I'd use it as a brief intro before you get into the original sources. pretty well-written and useful imo

[Anonymous No.17642952]

>>17641458
https://open.umn.edu/opentextbooks/textbooks/an-introduction-to-philosophy

[Anonymous No.17643035]

Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy:
https://www.routledge.com/Routledge-Contemporary-Introductions-to-Philosophy/book-series/SE0111

[Anonymous No.17643061]

>>17641458
Read Bryan Magee's The Story of Philosophy

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1465445641

[Anonymous No.17643090]

>>17641941
Seconded

[Anonymous No.17643123]

>>17641458
Coplestone then Plato then Descrates then whatever you want (save the more difficult ones like Hegel or Kant)

[Anonymous No.17643579]

[Anonymous No.17643611]

>Thirdly, McGeehan concluded that Russell held immoral views regarding sexuality on the basis of four of his popular and non-philosophic books (On Education, What I Believe, Education and the Modern World, and Marriage and Morals), and that his opinions regarding sexual relations between college-aged students amounted to an endorsement of abduction, rendering him morally unfit to teach philosophy and an advocate of lawlessness. In the books, Russell advocated for sex before marriage, homosexuality, temporary marriages, and the privatization of marriage, among other things.

What the fuck was his problem?

[Anonymous No.17643721]