12 Answers

  1. Before you understand philosophy, you should at least have a little idea about it: which will help you navigate the world of philosophy and see how philosophical thought has changed from century to century, the evolution of philosophical mysliposovet two books one of them is written in an artistic sense, with a plot with examples very good book world beszeller: this is Justine Gorder's “Sofia's World” won't regret2) The second book is also a bestseller of the great English philosopher, this is a list of lectures for American students, published in a separate book, this is Bertrand Russell-a history of Western philosophy

  2. “Aphorisms of everyday wisdom” by Arthur Schopenhauer, Pir Phaedon of the State of Plato, in general, any Greek or Roman philosopher writes quite easily and interestingly, and you can learn a lot of interesting things from the works of ancient philosophers

  3. The famous philosopher Karl Raymond Popper remarked: “All people are philosophers.” What did he mean by that?!

    I think, in my opinion, that philosophy is not the clever words ” ontology “or” epistemology”, it is not the great philosophers, starting with the ancient Greeks Thales, Zeno, Plato or Aristotle; not the classics of philosophy like Kant, Hegel and Feuerbach; nor even the modern luminaries like Schopenhauer, Wittenstein or Spengler.

    Philosophy is primarily the science of thinking and how a person thinks relates to their practical life. Unfortunately, in the Soviet school, as well as today, such an understanding of philosophy was often forgotten and is still being forgotten.

    But not everything is hopeless. In American high schools today, there are many talented philosophy teachers who are able to captivate the beauty of thought or at least teach how to apply philosophy in life.

    For example, Mark Rawlens 'book” The Philosopher at the Edge of the Universe ” shows exactly this approach, when analyzing famous American science fiction action films, the reader is introduced to the methodology of the philosophical approach, as if by the way.

    Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy is a much more serious book that needs to be read slowly and carefully.

    And of course, to begin with, I would recommend the works of the Russian philosopher Berdyaev Nikolai Alexandrovich. But with this philosopher, you need not just to read his thoughts, but also to argue where you see fit. Because Berdyaev's philosophy is contradictory. Once Nikolai Alexandrovich was asked why he should not remove the contradictions or resolve them philosophically?! To which the Russian philosopher replied: “Without these contradictions, there is no such thing as my philosophy.”

    Good conversationalists for you.

  4. I would advise you to switch to philosophical novels instead of works on philosophy – and it is easier and more interesting to read, and all theories are shown in the scenery of life, and not as bare concepts. In addition, such novels often contain references to works or philosophers, so it will not be difficult to find the author of your favorite thoughts.

  5. Just to give an answer to such a question is impossible, as for me. “Interesting” is a purely individual thing. And just like that, reading the philosophy “out of nowhere”, some randomly taken works by random authors, you can extremely misunderstand the author's message, and in general-the main idea. If I were you, I would first work with critical literature. I recently discovered such a wonderful person as Arseniy Gulyga. Doctor of Philosophy, Soviet historian of philosophy, he wrote interesting books on some important philosophers. It is interesting that in addition to the biography (which, in my opinion, is very important to know when meeting a particular philosopher), the pages of these books also reveal the main philosophical ideas of the person under study. After reading their summary, everyone will be able to decide for themselves how much they are interested in it. I find it much easier to decide whether to spend your precious time on philosophy in general, and on a particular person in particular. I can recommend Gulyga's book about Kant myself. It is easily found on the Internet, is very easy to read and provides more than exhaustive information about Kant as a person and about Kant as a philosopher.�

    And the benefit… This is also an abstract concept. Brag in the right society that you are familiar with the work of a particular philosopher, apply this knowledge in a conditional article, or simply load your brain with food for thought and have a good time – also benefits. In general – good luck in your search!

  6. Of all the candidate's minimum in philosophy, I remember Schopenhauer most of all. Fun writing, especially about women ) ………………..

  7. Philosophy is a simple thing, but the philosophers themselves, not understanding what kind of world they live in, did everything so that other people would not understand this when reading their works. In fact, most philosophers are self-employed. What they are looking for is not clear or necessary to anyone. However, there are literally a few who lived and wrote “incorrectly”. If you want it to be INTERESTING and UNDERSTANDABLE, read Michel Montaigne. A man who did not build abstruse theories, but simply wrote “for life”. His writing was interesting, clever, and clear. Unlike all these idiots. Read it, have fun and learn a lot of everyday wisdom. In addition to the “Experiments”, there are also “Persian Letters “and” Hermes Cup”. It reads like good fiction.

  8. A question from the series “How to observe innocence and acquire capital”😉, but if it is addressed to me personally, I will try my recipe “scribble”…�

    1. “Interesting” and “practical”, as already noted here, are rather “or” than “and”, and if both are the latter (i.e., together), then in a potentially dangerous way for the personality of the “inter-intern”. To be interested, M. Heidegger said, is “to be between” (literally – inter esse) the objects of one's interest, i.e. not to coincide with them or with others…. Be yourself : (To look for utility / practicality – to be on the side of the external (professional, everyday, social) environment in which you want to fit in organically, and those means (knowledge, skills, stereotypes, books, ideas, language… ), with the help of which such “fitting” into the external is carried out.�

    2. A rare variant of a more or less harmonious combination of interest and practical usefulness of philosophy – if a person wants to professionally engage in it as a researcher and / or teacher, consciously and consistently goes to this. But in my opinion, there are few such professionals. Moreover, in my opinion, a significant number of the most interesting and outstanding characters of the “Big Philosophy” (half of those named here) came/entered it “through the window” (from literature, religion, science, etc.), i.e., from the “Big Philosophy”. unguaranteed, random, � – may be out of interest in it, but clearly not out of practical interest.�

    3. Randomness here does not detract from the significance of such examples: a case turns out to be happy, but only if (pun intended) the person with whom it happens is ready to see what is necessary for themselves – a problem, a challenge, a mystery-in a seemingly indifferent accident. A good philosophical text (and it doesn't necessarily have to be “from philosophy” – that is, it should be written in Russian). or to be written by a philosopher, or at least to be recommended by some authority knowledgeable in philosophy) – necessarily a provocation (not necessarily shock and shocking), causing you to talk about yourself, putting you in doubt (at least such as “I don't understand THIS” or “I DON't UNDERSTAND this” or “I don't understand this”).

    4. Not every text in the category “philosophy” has such charisma – not everyone who sincerely aspires to it can recognize this charisma – not everyone who has managed to do this is able to control / reproduce this state of fascination and capture by a thought that is not yours (you have read it), and not the author (because he is no longer there or near – the book is only a trace of what may have happened to him), and at the same time yours, and him, and anyone else who will be able (who will be able) to get into the same state of thought.�

    5. Returning to the question (did I move away from it? 😉 ): for me, the texts of M. Mamardashvili have such charisma, one of the passages of which I did not literally repeat in the previous paragraph.�

    Thanks for the question. Good luck!!!

  9. 1) Karl Popper:�

    “Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach”, 1972 (Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach.)

    On the principle of separation of pseudoscience and science-falsifiability.

    2) Aristotle's Organon (group of works)

    About logic.

    3) “Computing Machines and the Mind” by Alan Turing, 1950.

    On the possibility of the existence of a mind not in a living being.

  10. I proceed from the fact that philosophy, as well as the head, is a “dark subject” (c) and therefore I will advise what, in my opinion, is close enough to the reality around us and, at the same time, is quite easy to read. Since I'm currently studying at the Graduate School of Social Sciences at the Higher School of Economics, my philosophy is mostly social:)

    1. Eric Hoffer, The True Believer. The author is a real “existential philosopher” – self-taught, farmhand, homeless in America. A real book “for life”, written in simple language and perceived very easily by almost any reader. �Strongly recommended.

    2. Herbert Marcuse, “The One-dimensional Man”. The author is one of the classics of the so-called “Frankfurt school” of social philosophy, a Freudian Marxist, one of the ideological leaders of the “new left”. In the early 60s, from an extremely pessimistic position, he described the future society of post – (new/reflective) modernity.

    3. Jean Baudrillard, “Consumer Society”. Baudrillard is one of the classic “postmodern”philosophers. The title says it all.

    4. Michel Foucault, “To supervise and punish”,” The Birth of the clinic”, etc. Foucault-it is difficult to describe in other words, this person continues to have a huge impact on the humanities and social sciences. It's worth reading, even if you don't know anything about philosophy, sociology, or cultural studies.

    5. Lev Shestov, “The Apotheosis of groundlessness”. Shestov is a classic of Russian existentialism.�

    6. Peter Berger, Thomas Lukmann, “Social Construction of Reality”. In a good way, this is, of course, theoretical sociology 🙂 A kind of applied reading of Husserl's phenomenology, approximate to socio-cultural reality. I can't help but advise you, because I love you dearly:)

  11. But in mathematics, what is most useful in practice? In everyday life – school mathematics. But in Einstein's practice, completely different tools, formulas, and calculations turned out to be most useful.

    I was studying philosophy, and a guy from the psychology department came up to me one day and asked when we would have philosophy on the schedule. I asked him,”What is it?”

    He asked for a “regular” one… But there was no such thing.

    Philosophy is an abstract thing, and by making it applied, that is, practical, you get another science: psychology, sociology, political science, and even cybernetics can be born in such a makar.

    But I can add from myself that leaf through the works under the brand “philosophy of life” is the most useful in practice, while remaining a philosophy, and not degenerating into any science.

    Examples of authors:

    Dilthey, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer

  12. The most interesting book on philosophy I've read is The Eye of Reason by Douglas Hofstadter and Daniel Dennett. This is a collection of fascinating stories and thought experiments designed to change our understanding of issues such as consciousness, personality, and free will. More on the topic:” The Illusion of Self ” by Bruce Hood,” Consciousness explained ” by Daniel Dennett,” Free Will that Doesn't Exist “by Sam Harris,” Freedom Evolves ” again by Daniel Dennett. If you don't know English, you can find Russian review literature on these books. For example, an overview of Dennett's theory can be found in the book” The Boston Zombie ” by Dmitry Volkov. Richard Dawkins ' “Selfish Gene” is also interesting. The book offers an advanced look at the evolution of life and culture.

Leave a Reply