So, I am asking people what they think about this, and how they find the right balance for themselves. — Jack Cummins
The only problem which I end up with is that the reading life can be so lonely because most of the people who I interact with daily barely read, and definitely believe read philosophy books. — Jack Cummins
How important is our reading as the foundation for philosophical explorations? — Jack Cummins
I agree! But, doesn't that create a "bias" to what you already believe? Does that bias keep one from having an open-mind? So, which is more important - an open mind, or bias-conformation? — Don Wade
I am raising this question because I was looking at answers in threads which I created and observed such a mixture of people coming from the basis of their reading of others' ideas from reading, and those based on the person's own thoughts. I realise that both are important but I do see it as a tension. — Jack Cummins
How can we improve our approaches to our reading to make it a solid basis for our philosophical adventures and investigations? — Jack Cummins
I agree. So, should we read anyway? — Don Wade
Reading serious philosophy is hard work. So you have to push yourself to do it, it's like training. Academic training can be useful in that it makes you articulate your thoughts and consider objections and different points of view. — Wayfarer
He said, during the course of the conversation, and somewhat tongue-in-cheek, 'the Greeks, the Medievals, the Germans - that's all you have to know, the rest is rubbish!' :-) — Wayfarer
Reading serious philosophy is hard work. So you have to push yourself to do it, it's like training. Academic training can be useful in that it makes you articulate your thoughts and consider objections and different points of view.
The other thing is to read thematically and synoptically. Philosophical literature is so vast in extent that you could read full-time and barely scratch the surface. Find some key themes or ideas and explore them through the history of ideas. Reading synoptically means reading the better secondary sources, especially useful for extremely complex works like Kant's. They will often provide an overview of the structure and intentions of a work which makes it much easier to comprehend. — Wayfarer
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.