Difficulty understanding philosophy

[Drkshadow03]

I very much doubt that. I'm always surprised when I hear a member of today's elite (outside politics) say he or she is a theist. If we go one step down from the elite, and just look at jobbing philosophers, here's a survey result:

God: atheism 72.8%; theism 14.6%; other 12.6%.

http://io9.com/what-percentage-of-ph...-god-485784336

This is quite similar to the result for scientists of a similar standing.

And yet here is a related study done by The Institute for Jewish and Community Research, which describes itself as an independent, non-partisan think tank.

From the conclusion: "The data were surprising in revealing that faculty are more religious than many observers might have conjectured. Certainly, most
faculty are not anti-religious. Most faculty believe in God, identify with some religious tradition, want their children to have some religious
training, and attend religious services at least occasionally. Not so surprisingly, compared to the general public, faculty are less religious on nearly all measures.

In the study, they also found Math, science, and Social Science faculty were the least likely to believe in G-d, while those in health and education were the most likely to believe in G-d, followed by Business Faculty.

[hypatia_]

I would say one more thing about reading introductory texts, and why it's wrong to read interpretations of thinkers. 1) You're introducing a filter, another imperfect mind interpreting your source, and that dilutes and pollutes what you receive. By reading a philosopher, you are already reading someone else' thoughts about life, about reality, "the crumbs from another person's table," in the words of Schopenhaur. I am of one mind with Emerson and he and many others who place so much emphasis on your own mind, your own understanding, your own perception and experience and knowing.

You are introducing a filter by stating what philosophers you feel people should focus on! Having said that, I appreciate the outline you have created; it is definitely a good jumping off point for someone intimidated by centuries of works.

[OscarWildebeest]

A very relevant, a very intriguing thread, after reading all of it! If I may contribute?

The most complex something about the philosophers and their philosophy is the manner in which writers write about them/it. However, like a painting: I think it was Kandinski who stated that the success of a painting depends on the extent to which it expresses the personality of a painter. Understand the man, and you will understand his philosophy. There also is the further problem of the context of words as it relates to a specific time frame, and the accompanying translation. (The late professor Guthrie explains this in his simple "The Greek philosophers"). Also, one needs to read the philosophers in sequence for mostly they reacted to what has gone before.

That said I am presently attempting to simplify most of them, if you would like to read? http://www.online-literature.com/for...ers-simplified.

Thank you.