Hello /lit/, I'm visiting from /mu/ today!
I'm planning on studying philosophy next semester, but I'm not an avid reader. Will this be problematic? Should I read anything in advance to better be prepared? I'm studying the subject only because I've always been very intrigued by philosophical discussions. Is this dumb? Will I walk into something I'll hate. Please help, I might be moving away for this in only a few months.
why do so many /mu/ pseuds board hop to /lit/?
Philosophy is more than just "thinkin bout life", it's about logic and systems of thought and you have to interact with texts in a far different way than you're used to. Though I imagine you're taking a piss easy intro course anyway in which either they'll guide you into the way you should be reading philosophy, or they'll just spoonfeed you reductive highlights from it. Just do what you should be doing anyway, if you're having trouble talk to the professor.
>>7945973
It won't be a problem as long as you become an avid reader and have the capability and passion to be one. Research some philosophers and read them. Also don't be intimidated by the kids at school who come in with prior knowledge, befriend them if they're legit, but usually they'll be some pretentious fag. You won't know the difference at first but it will become very clear soon after.
>>7945973
>pop music
You're too dumb and will probably just write about patriarchy anyway.
>>7946281
>stereolab
>pop
>>7945973
>avid reader
>>7945973
The readings in Philosophy are mostly short papers, not long books. You'll be fine.
>>7946284
stereolab is largely pop with krautrock influences at times but that's a stupid reason to hate a great band
>>7946389
You'll get no argument for me that they're ______-pop but they are totally different from baseline pop to where it's a poor descriptor.
>>7945973
Philosophy 101?
If the teacher tells you your answer is wrong tell him it doesn't matter because he isn't even real.
>>7945973
If you can't rationalize the fact that you're going to have to become an avid reader, you shouldn't be a philosophy major. Philosophy is not just 3AM conversation with really insightful peers and mentors, it's reading and being able to attack the logic behind claims for the most part. I think you should mainly be worried about your concept of philosophy as of now, if you're not reading a lot of simple texts and arguments you'll have a very difficult time reading some of the densest texts and ideas in the word. Just don't become a caricature of yourself, the internet has convinced a lot of people they should become philosophers. If you're not an avid reader and largely don't see yourself enjoying reading then I can guarantee you like the idea of philosophy more than philosophy itself.
>>7946474
Don't listen to this guy. Professional philosophy does not require much reading. A strong mathematical background is more important.
>>7946478
Don't listen to this guy. Professional philosophy requires a ton of reading. A strong background in linguistic comprehension is more important.
>>7946478
You're full of shit. The only math in philosophy are basic logic statements. There's no algebra, calculus or geometry in philosophy.
>>7946482
Ah /lit/ - home to 20 year old shut-ins who pretend to know anything about life outside their basements.
I have a PHD in the subject and can tell you honestly that philosophy does not require much reading at all. Most professional philosophers never take more than a class or two in history of philosophy (philosophy before 1945). Actually doing philosophy is 95% reading and writing short journal articles.
The best background is math and/or philosophically interesting sciences like physics, computer science, or neuroscience.
>>7946494
Said the teenager who no clue what philosophy even is.
>>7946515
Honors student with a full scholarship at a Top 10 college. Not sure what your program was but this is ridiculous.
>>7946526
I'm telling you what philosophy actually *is* at the grad level and above. Nobody in mainstream philosophy is reading/citing Epictetus or Hobbes. They are citing fellow philosophers who published articles in 2015.
>>7946554
I'm aware of that. OP seems to be going into undergrad, which is entirely different and almost entirely reading based with little mathematics.
>>7946515
How are inconsistent ideologies 'philosophically interesting'?
>>7946607
Not that anon, but the hottest shit in the past 50 years has come from alleged psychologists and sociologists. Mostly marxists. Philosophy is an anthropological pursuit for the most part.
>>7946607
Kill yourself.
>>7945973
There's a book called "sophie's world" by Jostein Gaarder or some similar spelling. It's philosophy 101 shoehorned into a novel format. It's really all you need to get ready for the intro level.
>>7946618
Nope. No one reads hand-wavy French pseudo-intellectuals in philosophy departments.
>>7946634
Neal Stephenson's 'Anathem' is a better introduction to philosophy in the form of a novel.
>>7946641
>not reading Phenomenology of Perception
It's like you think the cartesian was right.
>>7946641
yeah instead they read hand-wavy American pseudo-intellectuals
>>7946630
If you hate philosophy, you really shouldn't be posting in this thread, son.
>>7946650
Nobody reads Merleau-Ponty in philosophy departments.
I'm sorry if I'm bursting your bubble here, but the facts are the facts. OP should know exactly what he is getting himself into.
>>7946668
Stop shitposting.
>facts are facts
This is how I know you're shitposting.
>>7946675
Have you ever been in a Philosophy PHD program? Or are you just another pimply retard on the internet? That's what I thought.
I actually know what I'm talking about. You don't.
>>7946697
See. More shitposting.
>Mfw MAth majors seem to have a natural propensity for analytic philosophy
>mfw i realize math n logic are goat, analytic philos is goat, schopenhauer is goat too
>yfw philosophy has a lot of overlap with math and logic but there are of course aspects to both math and philosophy that are mutually exclusive, thus why they exist as separate disciplines
>>7946707
>logic
Back to Lebbit please.
>>7946718
what u mean? afraid of logic and reason my man?
>>7946702
You want actual numbers, is that it? Here you go:
>The 267 Most-Cited Authors in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (born 1900 or later):
http://schwitzsplintersunderblog.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-266-most-cited-contemporary-authors.html
>The 500 Most-Cited Items in four general-interest philosophy journals, 1993–2013 (bottom of page):
https://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/19/lewis-and-the-women/
No Merleau-Ponty to be found. Sorry.
>>7946730
>these things are good because they defend my ideology
Lebbit; go.
>>7946718
also, sadly ive dwelt here since 2008 so jokes on you!
>>7946740
how is a system of proof by induction an "ideology"? I can think of instances where linguistic philosophy is simply just ideology. Logic is a method not an ideology and produces a very useful kind of result.
>>7946752
If you hate philosophy as it is actually practiced, leave the thread.
>>7946755
Post ur work so we can laugh at the ontological implications of it.
>>7946755
>as it is actually practiced
By pseuds shitposting, like you, on the internet?
Go with your friend back home if you would.
>>7946764
please form arguments, kid. youre the fucking cancer.
>>7946764
Stop clogging up the thread with shitposts, you embarrassing sperglord.
>>7946768
>kid
I'm older than you.
>arguments
muh logic confirms logic
>>7946773
You have the mental age of an 8 year old.
>>7946773
how can you form an argument if not for logic? like what form of communication would you be dealing with? muh emotions?
>>7946799
You're a drooling simpleton who's incapable of elementary reasoning. Time to end it.
>>7946812
>YORE DUMB FOR NOT ACCEPTING MY IDEOLOGY FUCKING CHRISTIANS!!!
>>7946515
>there's only one type of philosophy
noted
>>7946697
Nice informal fallacy, Mr. Philosophy.
>>7946825
There's only 'one type' if you want a career in academic philosophy.
>>7946839
maybe you shouldn't have brought up professional philosophy when everyone before you was talking about it as a major, dumbo.
>>7946821
Go start a thread on theology if you want to shitpost about that. You deranged fuck.
>>7946846
Because you will be dealing with the same 'professionals' and addressing the same subjects?
OP here, I went to bed after posting the thread. Having read trough the thread I suspect I'll feel much at home. I seem have a relatively good idea of what the subject entails contrary to what some here presumes. I come from quite a strong math background which I perceived as helpful from this thread. Most of all I found that a lot of people here to find themselves in stupid arguments which they cannot drop. A feeling I can heavily identify with. The amount of reading I should be expecting to do still seems unclear, due to you not knowing what it is I'll be studying. I'm currently planning on studying at least a year of theoretical philosophy at a university in Sweden. Thanks for all the help!
I'm sure nobodies said this before, /lit/ is lit!... "haha"
>inb4 "seems"
>>7945973
>Hello /lit/, I'm visiting from /mu/ today!
That is a great album. Jenny Ondioline is my shit. By the way, you kind of came to the wrong board for a question like this. 90% of this board is angry NEETs who reccomend that you "read the entire western cannon" or "start with the Greeks" when you ask for an entry point to anything. I am shooting you straight because of our mutual interest in Stereolaband I'm from /mu/ too.
>I'm planning on studying philosophy next semester, but I'm not an avid reader. Will this be problematic?
No. Usually not a whole lot of reading assigned in philosophy classes.
>Should I read anything in advance to better be prepared? I'm studying the subject only because I've always been very intrigued by philosophical discussions.
Not necessary. I read some philosophy on my own in high school but I was honestly too young for it and most of it probably went over my head.
>Is this dumb? Will I walk into something I'll hate.
Of course not. You are choosing something that interests you. Worst case scenario, just switch majors. I went into college undeclared.Source: I got my degree in philosophy
>>7946281
lol
>>7946515
>Ah /lit/ - home to 20 year old shut-ins who pretend to know anything about life outside their basements.
This, desu. I hate these kind of threads because it kind of makes me realize how shitty people can be on this board. More concerned with brandishing their big dicks than actually helping beginners.
>>7947461
Welp, I typed this out then saw this. Posting anyway...
Curious as to which one /lit/ likes more
http://www.strawpoll.me/10006390
>>7946739
kek, what a shitheap
>>7946863
no you just fucked up is all
>>7947744
Consider the fact that everyone clicked on a picture of the Stereolab album. It's likely that they'd enjoy it on the basis of them being here.
finishing my undergrad in philosophy in a week
95% of the people in the major are fucking retarded and haven't read anything assigned to them
the other 4% do the readings and don't retain any of the relevant arguments
the other 1% will one day make a substantial contribution to an important body of knowledge, but if you are in this 1% then your undergraduate major choice is unimportant
>>7947759
The reality of academic work tends to induce panic attacks in teenaged fedora-wearing edgelords. Walk it off.
>>7947934
Gonna go out on a limb and guess that you are not exactly a Princeton student.
>>7947901
I clicked on it because of the Stereolab album but prefer Boces
>>7945973
>I'm visiting from /mu/ today!
Stopped reading right there. Fuck off.
>>7945973
Just keep in mind philosophers often come up with their own meanings. So you can't accept what you understood as what the guy meant, you have to try to understand what he meant.
Does anyone have a zip archive of main philosophy books? The torrents I've found are no good.
