Philosophy and/or Stuff

[FoghornBellows]

Yo, I purchased "A History of Western Philosophy," by Bertrand Russell for $9.99 at Borders.
I know you all told me to start with Socrates and Plato, but do you think that this contextual framework will be enough: if I plow through this tome, do you think I'll be able to comprehend Nietzsche and the absurdists/nihilists/existentialists? These philosophers interest me the most because they seem the most down to earth. I don't want to read about the massa damnata or waltzing in a Platonic wonderland. I'm digressing. If any of you have skimmed or read the work, I'd appreciate your two cents.

- M

[ALF]

Read this book well, Then go directly and read Nietzsche and existentialists themselves.

[DanielBenoit]

Quite a good introduction. I liked how the chapters were divided by the philosophers. Go straight to the Nietzsche chapter, though I must warn you that Russell's interpretation is rather inaccurate.

As for Niezsche The Gay Science is the best place to start. Great great book.

[sangha]

Getting into Nietzsche I found it easier to pincer onto him. I alternatively read his far influences: Schopenhaur/Kant and then Adler, Sartre, Foucault. It got complicated, but when I sat down with Nietzsche, I was able to draw much more from it than I suspect I would have just with vague articulations of his theories.

Please do not come into the "will to power" concept with preformed notions within your head. Understand Kant and Schopenhaur, but don't let critics of Nietzsche tell you what the will to power is, it needs to be understand alone.

[NikolaiI]

Well someone may have recommended you Bert Russell, but others (myself included) may consider he is not that bright. :p

I would recommend, there is a book which has writings of 12 different European philosophers, starting from Descartes and ending with Nietzsche. I would recommend this, although I hate to give you more books to read! :p This one is good because the selection is good with good translations (and I really think it is one of the best persons to start with - Descartes), and it is also printed nicely with a good cover, and it's quite easy to dive into. I believe it's called European Philosophers, from Descartes to Nietzsche, or something like that.

So that's my 2 cents (sorry I haven't read the Bert Russell book). Just that you would be better off perhaps beginning with Descartes than Russell. And then after you read a couple of those (Pascal is also good - not that you necessarily should agree with his philosophy, which is tending toward Christianity, but because he was a brilliant philosopher and studying his thinking is a valuable tool.) And then - Plato is really great, though. Definitely an invaluable asset in your philosophical knowledge.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Yo, I purchased "A History of Western Philosophy," by Bertrand Russell for $9.99 at Borders.
I know you all told me to start with Socrates and Plato, but do you think that this contextual framework will be enough: if I plow through this tome, do you think I'll be able to comprehend Nietzsche and the absurdists/nihilists/existentialists? These philosophers interest me the most because they seem the most down to earth. I don't want to read about the massa damnata or waltzing in a Platonic wonderland. I'm digressing. If any of you have skimmed or read the work, I'd appreciate your two cents.

- M

I don't know about this particular book, but generally yes of course. I would always say read where you fancy. It is perfectly acceptable, in my book, to get a general idea of some of the main points of something and then move on in another area as you will - you can always come back to it and read deeper later - no one is taking the book away from you!

[Babbalanja]

Well someone may have recommended you Bert Russell, but others (myself included) may consider he is not that bright. :p
Bertrand Russell is not that bright?

:rolleyes:

Regards,

Istvan

[NikolaiI]

Bertrand Russell is not that bright?

:rolleyes:

Regards,

Istvan

No, Bert Rurssell is rather a bore. He is not that bright. You won't find me say that kind of thing about too many philosophers but some like him are largely over-rated.

[Babbalanja]

No, Bert Rurssell is rather a bore. He is not that bright. You won't find me say that kind of thing about too many philosophers but some like him are largely over-rated.
Well, of course Russell would never have said anything as exciting and wise as "Actually one thing I have thought of a lot is that all things are subjective, or relative."

I think FB would be much better off reading Russell.

Regards,

Istvan

[blazeofglory]

Of course one must read Russel but one should not stop at that when one has a great amount of inquisitiveness and going beyond it one can glean great knowledge from eastern masters. Try reading J Krishnamurti and you will dis-tangle yourself from a web of confusions.

[Uberzensch]

I would say use Russell's book for reference. Remember, Russell is writing about other philosophers from his perspective. It's useful, but remember that it's not the final word on any philosopher in the book.

As for Nietzsche, I always found his Beyond Good and Evil as a great starting point to his philosophy.

[billyjack]

He is not that bright.

he is a BRIGHT though. which right there makes him a heap smarter than most

[JommiL]

Well, if you want to read some philosophy, Georg Henrik von Wright is quite intresting. He had very clear thoughts.