I've started reading this, is it a good way to get into philosophy?
What would the next step be?
seems like an interesting thread on Nagal that could emerge.
>>7745407
Thomas Nagel is a pretty cool guy. Eh shits all over Daniel Dennett and doesn't afraid of anything.
>>7745982
Where's a good place to start with him? I am only slightly aware of his work.
>>7745982
Where can I see Nagal shitting on Mr. Double Ds? Sounds like my kind of philosophical scatological fetish porn to be honest family.
G
>>7745997
>>7746030
He wrote the article 'What it's like to be a bat', which claims that physicalist-reductionist theories cannot deal effectictively with the matter of subjectivity - which of course made Dennett go complete apeshit and (as I recall) dedicated an entire chapter in Conciousness.. to saying 'nu-uh'.
A couple of years ago he wrote Mind and Cosmos, which I thought was pretty speculative and far fetched, but interesting nonetheless. Basically a quasi-religious (pan-psychist) argument from a self-professed atheist.
So, is this a legit way to get into philosophy or have I been fooled?
>>7746369
Seems legit.
muh Nagel
>>7746369
its good, if bland
>>7745407
read sum of the classics like
-Plato's Republic
-Hume's Enquiry
-Descartes's Meditation
after you familiarized yourself with all the philosophical topics and great works, it's time to ask yourself "what am I particulary interested in" and get into contemporary discourse on that subject(s)
http://plato.stanford.edu/ could provide a nice overview of important contemporary names for any given topic
if you have access to a well sorted public library, get a pass and start checking out articles in journals too
don't forget to pick up a philosophical dictionary (i don't know the english one's) and look up what words mean in a philosophical context as you run across them in texts, especially terms like
-sufficient
-neccesary
-possible world
-validity
have a specific meaning in modern philosophy and you will run across them very often
give yoursefl a few years and valla, you're a self thaught philosopher able to contribute with your own writing
>>7749200
Thanks.
I already have all that, all I lack is Hume, strange, I thought I had it downloaded.
This is the suggested reading list for Cambridge philosophy applicants, you might find it intersting: http://www.phil.cam.ac.uk/prosp-students/prosp-ugrad-readlinglist
It has a lot of the books that have been mentioned already.
Nagel's essay on Death is great and his essay on the absurd is even better. A better account of the absurd in one essay than all of Camus' shit in my opinion
>>7749801
Thanks a lot.
The /lit/ philosophy project is still online:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM
I don't know whether there's a newer version
>>7749801
Anyone have anything good to say about the philosophy bites podcast?
>>7745407
A good way to get into philosophy is to read up about what each philosiphy believes in, then choose one to dive into and read about. Then do the same for the others.
the 11 part philosophy chart is usually a good start if someone would post it.
Why is Anglo philosophy such trash?
>>7754586
bc their philosophy is really about screwing over the rest of the world.
germans produced grand phi bc they sucked at that
