7 Answers

  1. The only point of reading philosophers of the past outside of the curriculum is to problematize our own thinking, to see that the usual categories we use to describe ourselves and the world around us can be called into question, and we can become freer. There is also reading “according to the program”, when philosophers are read to see how they created a scientific method – but this is already the requirements of the university, and not the question of “whether it is worth it”.

  2. For two thousand years, human thinking has not changed much. It's worth it, absolutely worth it. I once went broke and bought Montaigne two volumes. (I still haven't finished reading it, I'm a lousy philosopher.) According to my very personal observations, Plato, Aristotle and Montaigne need to grow up.

  3. reading them, of course, will be hard ( or nothing? ), but I came across Platonism and Aristotelianism in the book “Zen or the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance”, which gives a very voluminous description of these two directions and generally talks about the origin of dialectics. And this, in my opinion, is the main thing that needs to be learned from there.

  4. Relevant,as always

    Everything is decided by the “dosage” right?
    In this case, it lies in the scale of the review of books.If you draw some ideas from it, projecting them to our time, correcting them from your own experience,then this will only benefit,like any other point of view from your own.
    But, gentlemen, you are not going to shout like cretins that man is a wingless and bipedal creature with flat nails, susceptible to knowledge based on reasoning?

    Now there are more precise definitions of a person,and a plucked chicken was also suitable for “Platonov's”…

    Over the years, centuries, the world has changed, improved and learned new things,if you learn basic wisdom, it will be good,but know the measure

  5. To my shame, I don't know Plato. But I can say the following about Aristotle: the old man was so smart that he understood that the world was changing, and it was changing in such a way that in a couple of thousand years someone might doubt his wisdom. He abstracted his experience to “basic concepts” about being. His framework teaches us to distinguish case from will, classes from instances, and the unique from the many; leading us smoothly to the idea that the world does not change at all.

  6. It is simply pointless to pursue any utilitarian goals when reading any work. This also applies to the works of Plato and Aristotle. They can not be irrelevant, their ideas were built on the entire Western (mostly, but not only; their influence on the Muslim world was also very great) part of the world: from philosophy and religion to natural and political sciences.

    However, of course, reading them in modern living conditions that are crystal clear from any intellectualism will be “reading for yourself”, to increase your own erudition. It remains only to ask yourself the question: do you need it?

  7. It depends on what it's used for. Reading and understanding late and even modern philosophy without them is difficult and probably not very correct, not only because they are used and implied, but also because they are referred to. And so, in general, everything that they described is more or less obvious for today. They just let it slip through their mouths

Leave a Reply