[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 21 KB, 300x340, nietzsche.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2633546 No.2633546 [Reply] [Original]

How do I into philosophy, /int/?

>> No.2633551

Philosophy is boring and useless. Don't do it.

>> No.2633565

Just read Bertrand Russell's A History of Western Philosophy, then choose who you're interested in. Ultimately, philosophy is useless now, physics is da wa 2 go.

>> No.2633572
File: 14 KB, 200x326, enchiridion-epictetus-paperback-cover-art.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2633572

>It's dangerous to go alone: here, take this!

Just find a topic or a school you're interested in, read about them, and move on from there. And disregard the shitty opinions in >>2633551 and
>>2633565

>> No.2633575

Read Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding.

>> No.2633581

>>2633546
>/int/

I love you, dude (not gay love, bro love!).

and philosophy is make question to oneself and search for the answer.

>> No.2633582

Read The Republic or any Philosopher from the Romanticism era.

>> No.2633584

Before asking how, ask why.

>> No.2633609

Don't.
Philosophy is fucking useless.

>> No.2633617

particle physics

>> No.2633621

>>2633609
you must be an ex philosopher

>> No.2633622

Philosophy is fun. I sometimes still read philosophy and find it interesting, the ideas some people come up with.
When I was young I took it seriously. Now it just interesting. Nothing more.

>> No.2633624

Discourse on the Arts and Sciences and On the Origins of Inequalities Among Men

Jean Jacques Rousseau

>> No.2633631

>>2633621
the outcome of someone who properly goes through philosophy is that they become an ex-philosopher. that guy is a prick for discouraging it though, its a good journey.

>> No.2633633

>>2633621

No, he's just /sci/. His fragile worldview leads to his fragile mind samefagging on /lit/ about the uselessness of thinking.

>> No.2633635

>>2633633

There's a difference between thinking and thinking about bullshit (aka philosophy).

>> No.2633641

>>2633633
on many levels it is actually useless, but you should come to learn that on your own. the other guy is only a dick for spoiling it.

>> No.2633643

>>2633635

Pathetic, bro. You can do better.

>> No.2633644

Philosophy is actually very useful if you have a ridiculous political ideology that is completely incompatible with reality.

>> No.2633645

a) Get a philosophical dictionary.
b) Start with whatever the fuck you're interested in (post philosopher/movement/subject and we can tell you a good place to start)
c) Just read, and look up the words you don't understand.
d) ???
e) Profit

>> No.2633851

>How do I into philosophy

You take a good book
You read it
You read it again
You read an interpretation of it by a respected philosopher
You read the philosophers that influenced your author
You reread the original book
You write about the book

By the point you can coherently express an insightful opinion about the object of your study, you know philosophy.

>> No.2633878

>>2633565
How about both?
I'm actually going to study both.

>> No.2633875
File: 2 KB, 126x122, slap330s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2633875

>>2633609
>>2633551
>implying philosophy means or tries to be useful

>> No.2633879

>>2633572
This man has the right advice, OP.

If I may make a personal recommendation though, read up on the Cynics.

>> No.2633886
File: 58 KB, 748x818, phil.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2633886

Read the Wikipedia articles on Plato, the Presocratics, and the Sophists. Keep firmly in mind that Plato is basically the granddaddy of the European practice of thinkin' about stuff. If this interests you, read the Apology, possibly the Crito, and one real dialogue dealing with Plato's metaphysics, probably the Timaeus. If you are still interested, commence eating Plato. It really doesn't take long. Make sure you understand each dialogue. Don't just drag yourself through it and read the Wikipedia article. If it's not readily making sense to you, you're reading it wrong, because frankly none of it is terrifically complicated. If you're totally lost, keep n mind Socrates will very often use sarcasm and satire, and several dialogues exist only to show faulty sophistic practices of logic and argumentation.

If you finish with Plato, feel a vague sense of enlightenment which you can't quite substantiate or articulate, but still feel compelled to post your retarded interpretations of Plato (particularly The Republic) to people who have never read him, then you did it wrong. If you are filled with a mixture of wonder for metaphysics and awareness of your own ignorance, continue doing philosophy, and enjoy Aristotle.

>> No.2633888

>>2633609
But in philosophy, we ask the question: why should anything be useful? Why should you do anything useful? And we scream: it and we shouldn't! And then we do philosophy.

O and btw:
>talking about useless
>posts on site where every thread is deleted after 2 days approx. and no memory of it recorded anywhere

>> No.2633913

>>2633888
http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/

>> No.2633946

>>2633913
Damn you!

My first point still counts though

>> No.2634961

>>2633878

Biotechnology & Philosophy fag here, it's the way to go.

When crafting gene modified specimen, there's always an ethical barrier that natural science, i.e biotechnology, can't deal with.

Philosophy supports science in this way, but I can agree that it's not important in itself anymore. Any mathematics are we can do are useless without science as well but that doesn't make math useless

>> No.2634976
File: 66 KB, 400x593, 1336107603309.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2634976

on a related note, how do i into schopenhauer?

>> No.2634977

Lets say you get a bachelor or masters in philosophy. What fucking job do you get after that?

>> No.2634992

>>2634976

please reply ;_;

>> No.2634996

>>2634992

This might help
http://www.booksshouldbefree.com/book/studies-in-pessimism-by-arthur-schopenhauer

I'm not really in to philosophy, but it is quite interesting.

>> No.2634997

I guess OP beat me to it

Any books you guys recommend? I just started reading the iliad not sure if it's about philosophy... yay or nay?

>> No.2635003

>>2634996

thankyou anon~

>> No.2635034

>>2634977
im an assistant professor and i do research.
youll need a phd and some postdoc experience. a masters degree alone wont get you anywhere in academics.

>> No.2635052

Read Stirner, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein and Baudrillard and you should be fine. Consult Cambridge Companions if need be.

>> No.2635062

>>2635052
Not OP.
Which work would you recommend for starting with Baudrillard?

>> No.2635074
File: 162 KB, 500x367, 1313005147312.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2635074

>>2633546

>> No.2635073
File: 3 KB, 126x126, 1336484283176.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2635073

>>2635052
>Read Stirner, Nietzsche, Wittgenstein and Baudrillard and you should be fine.

>> No.2635088

>>2635073
who would you add/quit?

>> No.2635089

>>2633582
>Romanticism
wat
I hope you weren't thinking about Hegel.

>> No.2635123

>>2634976
I recommend you have a grasp on the basic ideas of Plato and Kant before you start reading Schopenhauer. Use these:
http://plato.stanford.edu/
http://www.iep.utm.edu/

These two sites are good for reading up on whatever philosopher/school of philosophy you're interested in. Better than wikipedia anyway... but you should move on to reading actual books by the actual philosophers when you feel ready. Get "The World as Will and Representation" if you want to get into Schopenhauer.

>> No.2635129

This.
>>2635123

Also, before reading The world as Will and Representation I would recommend to read On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and On the Will in Nature. This will be very helpful to understand his major work.