I am 52 years old and never formally studied philosophy. Thank you for creating these series and for giving me some structure and guidance as I take on this wonderful subject. I really appreciate your teaching style.
I'm 25 year old high-school dropout and a working class wage earner, and I have been reading/listening/watching/studying philosophy for almost a year now on my own
They say that wisdom comes when it wants to. So for all my people who don't get it. I am there with you. But the ideas in these texts are designed to take a lifetime to understand. These things are designed to be hard on purpose. In essence it's like a riddle with a very vague answer that takes awhile and it takes a lot out of people to figure these things out. Because the ideas that these people have are really complex and requires a lot of thinking to it.
Step 1: Set up your life so that you have indefinitely no obligations except for quotidian sundries such as basic hygiene, eating and sleeping; because you will need all the time in the world.
Gregory B. Sadler that was Joyce’s idea with Finnegan’s, a reader subjected to an infinite or indefinite insomnia. Endlessly assembling the text. The virtue of your advise to read and reread does more than unpack that specific text but in a sense prepares the reader for a kind of more comprehensive interaction with all subsequent texts.
Having been a philosophy minor, I've found this very helpful. I've certainly had similar experiences with Nietzsche. I discovered Nietzsche in high school and always thought I knew what he was talking about. Going back now I realize that I hadn't even come close to skimming the surface of what Beyond Good and Evil or the Genealogy are about!
Glad the video was useful -- yes, I've had that "thought I knew X, but glad that now I actually do know X better. . . " kind of experience quite a few times!
like listening to the same song over & over. I hear new instruments, ad libs and understand a whole verse, chorus or song more clearly my third or fourth time listening.
Well, I'm not against Sparknotes or even Wikipedia entirely -- but they shouldn't get in the way of actually reading, thinking, reading again, thinking some more. They ought to be, at best, helpful voices on the sidelines
Well, I'd agree with you on all of that -- though I'd guess most of my students would not be quite sure about what I'm agreeing to/about with Derridian thought getting involved! I'd say that not only is it important to grasp the genesis (i.e. origin) in order to get the structure, let alone the bits of information that might get detached from the structure -- which is more often what students (and many philosophers) are after - it's important to keep returning to the work in which that is found
You're welcome -- let me ask, though -- how much background do you already have in Philosophy? Heidegger is tough not least because he makes so many references to other philosophers
I am an IT consultant (programmer) by profession but an aspiring philosopher at heart. I have always been interested in learning Philosophy. If you ask me why Philosophy, I would say that there are multiple reasons as to why I love Philosophy, all of which I am slowly realizing as I mature and learn. The main reason is the 'feeling' associated with studying Philosophy. A personal sense of both contentment and satisfaction is what is what I get. When I read a concept and understand what it truly is, how it relates to the world (or anything in it), the causality, the consequence, etc, that understanding lifts up a shroud hanging over my head. It lets me see clearly. This is a sort of feeling that nothing else in this world can offer me. To be frank, and at the danger of sounding like a teenager, this understanding of the world, causality, laws of nature, truth, and everything else Philosophy has to offer, fills the never-ending abyss in my Soul and quenches the unquenchable thirst. Unfortunately, there are a lot of factors that hinder my progress with learning Philosophy. It's not just about the lack of time or having a busy schedule day in and day out, but what my profession and work culture have done to the basic framework of my mind. To put it simply, due to the very nature of my work, I have been training myself to speed up the various processes of my mind, let it be analyzing a problem, finding out a solution or realizing the solution through coding and programming for a long time indeed. I have reached a stage where my mind instinctively and subconsciously (don't know if that's the right word) starts working on problems related to my work. It's akin to driving a car. We don't think about applying the brake when the car in front of us brakes. We just do it. It is instinctive. Or maybe the thought process is so fast that we don't realize it and hence it feels as if it doesn't exist. Either way, that is the state of my mind and I feel that's not how Philosophy can be done. A complete restructuring of my mind needs to be done, on a daily basis, if I want to pursue both my profession and my passion. This is quite taxing. Another hurdle that I am facing is that, since this is not my domain, I do not know what path to take. Who should I read first? Who next? Is there a prelude to all this? Should I go by Philosopher or School of thought? Its all quite confusing indeed. Apologies for the long comment, but any help from your side will be highly appreciated.
Hi Dr. Sadler, just wanted to thank you for sharing this beginner inter into Philosophy. I'm an artist recovering from a stroke that has disabled my left side, and I am left-handed so no more painting for me. Philosophy is an art form I never studied or envisioned myself having an interest in but after my stroke, I realized that for years I had been buying books on Philosophy having no idea why. Now I realize that always being curious and wanting to question has led me to Philosophy it's another way for my mind to try and discover the creative process of (reason). So again I thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Reading philosophy text is like inter into jungle , there are no highways no traffic lights no guidance; you have to create your own way own strategy and anything surprising can come on your way, may be good or bad...may break your previous Ideas and may give you new Ideas......and there is no way coming back to same position where you did start journey.
Well, I would suggest not trying to start with Heidegger then, and to go back to some of the great ancient, medieval, and modern thinkers for some time. Heidegger is presuming some knowledge of those people. You might actually discover you like one of them -- and get so much out of them -- that you don't miss the Heidegger!
Thanks, I'm glad you enjoy the videos. Yes, I think that could be a good DSCT video idea. I think you're right that there's been greater interest in his philosophy as of late.
2) You have a student who is very actively participating -- and often gets the material much more quickly than the others -- and they are so quick to respond, to post, to answer questions, etc. that they end up "ahead of tempo", so to speak, and the other students end up feeling sort of dampered. Now, if the rest of the students are lackadaisical, not really contributing, etc., it seems to me it's more their fault than the go-getter's
I'm going over Mortimer J. Adler's reading list in "How to read a book" I think it is a good list. I am a fan of the "great book" approach to education.
And YESS!!! My professor always thanked me after class for such depth and participation in class! Learning… an education… is now of such a high value to me that I treasure every moment in the seat.
First philosophical book I read on my own was Plato Republic in highschool-All I got were a bunch of weird looks or people thinking it was a book about actually silly putty plato
There are so many great books out there. How much time does it take to investigate some book? For example, I recently discovered russian philosopher Berdyaev; his article "On suicide" is such a great text, the problem is one can write a book on every paragraph in it. I'm in temptation to read it few more times, and it's ok, it's only some 20 pages. But when I read it, lets say 5 times, i read 100 pages - A short novel. And that's only an article, what to do with, for example, Schopenhauers "World as will and representation"? How to reread some text so many times and read other books too? How to concentrate so much on only one book and read some other books there are to be read, especially when that book is huge? Can one reread some book slowly and read some new text at the same time or should he stay with some work till he understand it as much as he can at the time?
There's no one-size-fits-all approach to the questions you're asking. Different books are different, and some readers find different approaches fruitful. I know I can read multiple books at one time. But that's me. I don't know whether you'll find reading more than one book at a time productive or not. You'll have to figure that out
I usually read multiple books at one time, but until now I reread some book only after two or three years since the last reading. However, it seems to me your approach could be very fruitful for me. Thanks for your advices :)
I think you touch on an important point here: that there are at once ideas which we wish to "transport" out of these texts but also a certain historical rootedness in which we find them; as you say, the "worlds of Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, Kierkegaard, etc." I have in mind here something like the challenge of Derrida who says that each structure must have a "genesis," and that this in turn must be understood in order to grasp how the structure functions.
I would also like to say that you should not read it like you would a normal book. If you're on page 150 and you don't get it then you need to back to page 1. In my experience the most important thing in reading philosophy is being able to follow the authors train of thought. That means trying to grasp the text sentence by sentence and using the dictionary EVERY TIME you don't understand a word. If you do this I think you will find Heidegger is very literal with his word selections.
A number of ways, none of which are entirely agreed upon. That's called the "Socratic problem". Not something I really worry about these days - but can easily search it
After subscribing, I have found more and more of your videos. This video is in the top 5 from you. I wish I had found your videos upon entering into Applied Ethics. Your “closer and closer” example was so accurate. I had not realized this would be enthralling. I found “read your text several times before class” (not verbatim) to be so useful! Even though I’ve maintained an A in philosophy classes…. You’ve really helped me achieve a next level experience with Philosophy. Being able to pass a course is one thing, understanding the context of what you read is another. Thanks Professor!
I was just thinking about this last night: not only in lectures but also in movies and shows, after watching them multiple times, my views on certain characters completely change. It's like gaining a deeper level of understanding and clarity. That's why I like to document everything that resonates with me my thoughts, conclusions, and insights and rewatch everything to uncover new layers each time.
I really appreciate your content, this video in particular! I've recently started reading philosophy and was initially discouraged, as I often found the meaning of texts difficult to discern. I've continued to read despite the frustration this causes, but have found that although I actively engage with the ideas of the texts' during lectures, I still struggle with fully grasping them as I read. I'm hoping this happens less frequently as I continue to read new works. Thank you again for your content! It's always very helpful and the quality far exceeds that of other creators on youtube.
I expect that it will happen less frequently as you keep on reading new texts. And remember, if you don't get it the first time around, that's to be expected
+beau crory That's all right -- "easy" and "difficult" are relative, not absolute, terms. Most of the texts I teach aren't all that easy for my students. . . .
I just completed my first pass through Epictetus' Discourses and I feel just as you described first readings usually make one feel (I think I got this part, these all sound like he's saying the same thing, no idea what he's saying here) and I'm glad to hear that repeated readings do elucidate more of what the writer is going for. On a first or second read through do you tend to try all of the comprehension questions you describe here? (What's being said? Who's saying it? Why say this? What could've been said instead?) Or do you tend to focus on certain ones for certain read throughs? I've said a few times now, but as a self-studying would-be philosopher your page is a real treat. Thank you.
Very good core concepts that I needed to be reminded of. I purchased a set of the Britannica Great Books of the Western world and being seventy and retired I have some time to absorb the ideas. Your guidance is appreciated, thank you
I think a lot of people have that view about themselves, not least because philosophical texts are indeed difficult, but a lot of teachers stress the difficulties, rather than help learners make their way through them
I'm not American neither from the UK I learned English by my self also I can't even buy philsophical books they are not available in my country so I turned to pdf files, I wish u have a method for this kind of situation. Also looking at the screen for long time burns my eyes so I'm curious what you can suggest, and thx for your ATP.
I tried note taking Nietzsche and comparing what i thought with spark notes and i wanted to punch myself in the head with frustration)))) the same with Dantes inferno, it was a perpetual wait what.
I started to read some philosophical articles which are assembled in an introduction to philosophy book and they are organised in way that shows you a core philosophical concept as being truth, then the next articles critique this concept and show its flaws. This kind of assembly helped me as a beginner student in being very careful about whether to follow any philosopher just because his work makes sense. Thus, do you find it better that after reading several texts of a certain philosopher to go and find works that critique these texts?
Thanks I like the fact that you take the time to make these. Your concept of reading and thinking, as you describe there, is close to the studying music or even taste. I like that view.
Greg, does it ever annoy teachers when a student participates too much? I took an ethics class last semester and enjoyed it a lot, however the other students seldom participated and, not wanting to monopolize discussion, I often held back my own comments and questions.
Hello Dr. Sadler, I love all your videos, i think they are highly educational and informative. I did have a question which might serve as a great topic for a chalk and talk perhaps. You mention in this video "How to read a philosophical text", that your not a big fan of Spinoza. Question: What elements of Spinoza's philosophy do you agree/disagree with? I've recently noticed a renaissance in Spinoza and his philosophy and I would very much like to know what your thoughts on this topic. Thanks.
+EnzoDiPasta You're welcome! Well, if you'd like to take a course, I do teach online courses, with the Global Center for Advanced Studies, and (coming soon) through my company, ReasonIO
Ha, I'm half way through reading Plato's symposium. It's like watching masters of a bitchfest competition, I've been laughing through most of it and wonder if it's just me, or do the experts react the same?
I'd have no idea what a "bitchfest competition" is supposed to be, so I couldn't say. The participants in the dialogue are certainly joking around with each other
Gregory B. Sadler how about a handbag fight, or a battle rap, rather than 'bitchfest competition'? All of the above but, of a standard that I've not seen before, frigging hilarious. :D
Gregory B. Sadler I may try to better explain it someday, I'm sure you're a busy man and I don't want to waste your time. In short: I've watched films and listened to (I'm not much of a reader) a lot of old stories from around those times and often wondered why so many of the people are portrayed as so serious, it's as if most back then have a total lack of humor and I don't think they did. Because of the way I was reading the symposium, to me a modernised comparison would be a rap battle etc. You are an expert and I know nothing so I may be dead wrong, I'm glad you said they were joking around, at least I realized that much.
Wtf Scully Aha! I would say a modernized version would be a dinner party, among friends who do engage in a good bit of joking with each other. Antagonism is just a side-show, though, not the main point. The point is to give a speech about Love, and that's what most of the participants do, each drawing on their own skills, background, capacities, etc.
I worked in Bay's Used Book store in Sudbury Ontario ( a university town) for a total of about 8 years. I got to see what people really read, what the fads are....and built a library of classic texts for a cheap price. When I read Plato I see Thrasymachus in Socrates face.( I'll wipe the snot off of it for you....) And oddly, I can identify with both characters. The debate is a real one regarding the nature of power, and the prescriptions of happiness. When lifting weights, the best thing is to give it a day to heal, and go back at it. I need to dwell on the wisest texts of both the Eastern and Western traditions...but I feel like I am getting stiffer, and not so subtle in picking up small and new insights that grow into more interconnections...holy crap....14:11 theres epectasis , or "achilles and the Tortoise". got to go....
I decided to start reading Nietzsche and started originally with Thus Spoke, but now switched to Beyond Good and Evil. My question is the following: Is it a good idea to approach the same book in two different languages? I got a hard copy of Beyond Good and Evil in English and a PDF in Spanish.
Hi proffesor, I am currently studying to be a foreing languages teacher but i am deeply interested in philosophy and i dont get as many philosophy courses in my University as I would like to, so I was looking for some self- teaching advice and that led me to find your content (wich is really helpful, by the way) and while I was watching your video I was wondering. how important would you say it is to read philosophical texts in their original languages? Should I definitley learn greek, german, french etc.? Did you do that when you were starting your studies? Maybe not when you were starting but later on? Big thanks for the content.
Hi Dr Sadler I recently acquired a hungry appetite for philosophy & am planning on reading many different texts. I have read some Nietzsche and some eastern texts but nothing else. I was wondering if you'd recommend a linear progression from ancient to modern or a more scattered approach to reading philosophical writings? Thanks in advance
Thank you, Dr. This is the best description on how to read philosophy that I've found. I guess mentioning reading something over and over again is a sign that I'm not necessarily an idiot. 😁
Do you have any specific advice for reading Kant. I have just started with the Critique of pure reason, and after looking up on the net, I figured that reading the Prolegomena along with it would help me understand it better. But it seems as I move forward with it, the less I seem to understand. The dryness of the work does not put me off, its the depth and sheer number of concepts that Kant constructs that I fail to grasp in all there entirety, and I am not even halfway through the book!! And Instead of reading the whole book again and again to gain a deeper understanding as you say , I tend to break it into smaller sections and work with each section again and again till I understand it completely and then move forward to the next section. Thanks.
It's quite all right with lengthy works to break them into sections (usually the author has done that), and work your way through them -- also to review a section. Keep in mind that my advice here was for whom? My students who would be reading perhaps 20-50 pages of a work at a time (e.g. one book of Plato's Republic). Kant is admittedly quite tough. To understand him, it helps to have a strong background in thinkers that came before him, and to understand his own terminology
Well, you certainly didn't pick the easiest text! It is a tough one, and you shouldn't feel bad about being lost. I'm going to shoot some videos in the Existentialism series on Being and Time in the next several months.
How do you find the balance between reading primary texts(actual text) and secondary texts(ranges from basic 'Routledge' text guidebooks to research papers/commentaries)? I presume that the former is prioritised to the latter, but when/how do you use the latter as means to understanding the former ?
I don't really worry about such a balance -- secondary literature (to which I myself contribute, on some thinkers) is not of the same level of value as primary texts, or rather, when it is, it's because it becomes its own new primary text. If secondary lit is helpful for understanding a given author or text, then great, read it if you like, or not. If it's not, or is off-base. . . well, you'll only really know that by knowing the primary material well.
Greg you really nailed it, especially for the older learner. Back in prehistoric times when phones had rotary dials I came home from my all expenses paid tour of S.E. Asia and I decided to go back to school. One of my instructors (Alvin Badeaux of Badeaux Engineering) told his class 'now you are trying to take all of the technical classes you can, but ten years from now you will wish you had taken management classes and finally later in your career you will wish you had taken liberal arts courses' ... how right he was. A few years ago I acquired (a story in itself) the 54 volume set of Britannica's Great Books and I have tried to work through the ten year reading program. It has been a struggle . Your lectures are a great help. Thanks again.
Great stuff professor and I loved how you related lifting weights (GAINS!) to the discussion. I really appreciate that you upload all these great videos onto here. Thank you
If some people spend their lives reading great philosophers and they keep discovering new meanings, does that mean that those great philosophers were vastly more brilliant than even some of the more intelligent people alive?
@@GregoryBSadler Hello. Thanks for the response! :) Yes, I agree that it's a better use of time to think about the content of the books and not wonder about how brilliant someone was, but I'm curious now: what else could be the reason for this?
I first found you while reading Plato's Republic. Then as a self proclaimed "life long learner", I read Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power. The book drove me to Locke and from my Studies of Locke I realized I wanted and needed a greater semi structured course on Philosophy. Thank you for posting these!
platos symposium - which is the best version/book to buy? there are many on amazon...i'd like the most original version - I found: Symposium by Plato (Author) but surprisingly only 7 reviews so not sure if this is the best starting point. thanks =)
No idea. I generally don't worry much about translations, since I can just go to the original, if I want to know precisely what's being said. So I'm not a good guide for that.
A couple basic questions that spring up: Over the span of time that you're reading a text, do you focus solely on that reading for that span of time or do you have multiple philosophy texts you read over any given duration? And also when do you feel satisfied to move away from a text and start another, especially if the next is related in some way to the current text?
Good question. So, if you're asking me personally, I've usually got a number of books open at any given time, but I don't really see that as a good thing to do! So, when do you feel it's time to move from one text to the next? There's no hard and fast rule for that -- I suppose it depends on what you aim to get out of the texts -- and keep in mind, you can always go back to a text
It does -- though I ought to point out that some profs can be annoyed over very small issues! I'd say that in my view, it can happen in two ways: 1) you get a student who has a high level of participation (and this sticks out even more if the others aren't really participating), and that student makes the participation primarily about themselves, their interests, their views, etc. [continued]
@crimsonsamuraiftw Yes, that is a good analogy. There's been some talk lately about using video games as a metaphor for education, which has a certain merit to it. I suppose we might talk about certain passages as being like "boss levels", and the like
Doing philosophy requires self-confidence. How else could you think to argue with Socrates? Explicitly put my question is: How can we really trust our own reason? (Obviously I'm speaking of myself ^^")
Well, if you can't trust your own, you've got a few options. One is just to place your trust in someone else's reason. Another is to just give up. Another is to strengthen your own rational faculities
@@GregoryBSadler Unless I'm underestimating the scope of what you mean by "rational faculties" you are not addressing my point. What if the problem is psychological?
I've been wondering about the dialogue of Plato's about friends (I don't remember if it is Lysis or not). I read that, but I didn't really agree with any of the lines of reasoning about why we have friends. Can you give any insight on the topic of friends, from a philosophical standpoint, and on what is intended to be inferred from Plato's dialogue on concerning friendship?
Gregory B. Sadler Oh! I didn't see them. Thanks! I've actually started watching your videos, from oldest to newest, in order. I'm going to watch them all, except for the ones that don't really pertain to my interests.
hey proffesor i am from assam in north east india. i have a question.what is the difference between platos communism and modern communism.what does modern communism means. in what context it is asked and what is the value of this question.
I would take a look at Plato's Republic and at Marx and Engel's Communist Manifesto. Differences should be readily apparent. The way it's prhased this sounds very much like an exam or homework question
thats right it is exam question thanks professor sadler.how to read theories in an intresting manner.how to think about the conditions in which these philosophers lived
i just watched this video… yeah, a bit late… but am now wondering if my study of Hegel’s Phenomenology of spirit might benefit from me reading through The WHOLE thing and then start over with your Half Hour Hegel series… have been tempted to read ahead, but thought it would be futile. (LOL) eager to read your comment. thanks for all you do
for anyone watching in 2020. and behold.
thank you for this!
You're welcome!
I am 52 years old and never formally studied philosophy. Thank you for creating these series and for giving me some structure and guidance as I take on this wonderful subject. I really appreciate your teaching style.
you're very welcome!
That's *awesome* that you set out to study, elyse!!! I wish more people were like you!
Fr
I'm 25 year old high-school dropout and a working class wage earner, and I have been reading/listening/watching/studying philosophy for almost a year now on my own
Hell yeah! This got me really excited to read some Philosophy.
Good!
Thanks for all your hard work; these videos have certainly helped me along my own path.
Matthew Davenport You're very welcome!
May I venture a request (if you haven't already covered him) - Levinas!
Well, I've already got a lot of projects on the docket at present. Perhaps down the line
For sure. You seem to have a full plate (mayhaps that Max Weber work ethic...? lol). Thanks again.
They say that wisdom comes when it wants to. So for all my people who don't get it. I am there with you. But the ideas in these texts are designed to take a lifetime to understand. These things are designed to be hard on purpose. In essence it's like a riddle with a very vague answer that takes awhile and it takes a lot out of people to figure these things out. Because the ideas that these people have are really complex and requires a lot of thinking to it.
Step 1: Set up your life so that you have indefinitely no obligations except for quotidian sundries such as basic hygiene, eating and sleeping; because you will need all the time in the world.
Good luck on that! I've never managed to be able to make that sort of situation
Gregory B. Sadler that was Joyce’s idea with Finnegan’s, a reader subjected to an infinite or indefinite insomnia. Endlessly assembling the text. The virtue of your advise to read and reread does more than unpack that specific text but in a sense prepares the reader for a kind of more comprehensive interaction with all subsequent texts.
Having been a philosophy minor, I've found this very helpful. I've certainly had similar experiences with Nietzsche. I discovered Nietzsche in high school and always thought I knew what he was talking about. Going back now I realize that I hadn't even come close to skimming the surface of what Beyond Good and Evil or the Genealogy are about!
Glad the video was useful -- yes, I've had that "thought I knew X, but glad that now I actually do know X better. . . " kind of experience quite a few times!
Interesting exposition. I enjoy your calm way of speaking.
Thanks!
The first one which I read and can, looking back, say I got something out of, was most likely Camus' Myth of Sisyphus
I watched this video just to understand the myth of Sisyphus better
like listening to the same song over & over. I hear new instruments, ad libs and understand a whole verse, chorus or song more clearly my third or fourth time listening.
Exactly!
Glad it was helpful for you
Well, I'm not against Sparknotes or even Wikipedia entirely -- but they shouldn't get in the way of actually reading, thinking, reading again, thinking some more. They ought to be, at best, helpful voices on the sidelines
Well, I'd agree with you on all of that -- though I'd guess most of my students would not be quite sure about what I'm agreeing to/about with Derridian thought getting involved!
I'd say that not only is it important to grasp the genesis (i.e. origin) in order to get the structure, let alone the bits of information that might get detached from the structure -- which is more often what students (and many philosophers) are after - it's important to keep returning to the work in which that is found
You're welcome -- let me ask, though -- how much background do you already have in Philosophy? Heidegger is tough not least because he makes so many references to other philosophers
No beard 😱
Yep, a long time back that was the case
I am an IT consultant (programmer) by profession but an aspiring philosopher at heart. I have always been interested in learning Philosophy. If you ask me why Philosophy, I would say that there are multiple reasons as to why I love Philosophy, all of which I am slowly realizing as I mature and learn. The main reason is the 'feeling' associated with studying Philosophy. A personal sense of both contentment and satisfaction is what is what I get. When I read a concept and understand what it truly is, how it relates to the world (or anything in it), the causality, the consequence, etc, that understanding lifts up a shroud hanging over my head. It lets me see clearly. This is a sort of feeling that nothing else in this world can offer me. To be frank, and at the danger of sounding like a teenager, this understanding of the world, causality, laws of nature, truth, and everything else Philosophy has to offer, fills the never-ending abyss in my Soul and quenches the unquenchable thirst. Unfortunately, there are a lot of factors that hinder my progress with learning Philosophy. It's not just about the lack of time or having a busy schedule day in and day out, but what my profession and work culture have done to the basic framework of my mind. To put it simply, due to the very nature of my work, I have been training myself to speed up the various processes of my mind, let it be analyzing a problem, finding out a solution or realizing the solution through coding and programming for a long time indeed. I have reached a stage where my mind instinctively and subconsciously (don't know if that's the right word) starts working on problems related to my work. It's akin to driving a car. We don't think about applying the brake when the car in front of us brakes. We just do it. It is instinctive. Or maybe the thought process is so fast that we don't realize it and hence it feels as if it doesn't exist. Either way, that is the state of my mind and I feel that's not how Philosophy can be done. A complete restructuring of my mind needs to be done, on a daily basis, if I want to pursue both my profession and my passion. This is quite taxing. Another hurdle that I am facing is that, since this is not my domain, I do not know what path to take. Who should I read first? Who next? Is there a prelude to all this? Should I go by Philosopher or School of thought? Its all quite confusing indeed. Apologies for the long comment, but any help from your side will be highly appreciated.
I'd say that this is the sort of situation in which you'd probably want to book a tutorial session - reasonio.wordpress.com/tutorials/
Hi Dr. Sadler, just wanted to thank you for sharing this beginner inter into Philosophy. I'm an artist recovering from a stroke that has disabled my left side, and I am left-handed so no more painting for me. Philosophy is an art form I never studied or envisioned myself having an interest in but after my stroke, I realized that for years I had been buying books on Philosophy having no idea why. Now I realize that always being curious and wanting to question has led me to Philosophy it's another way for my mind to try and discover the creative process of (reason). So again I thank you for sharing your knowledge.
You're very welcome. I'm sorry to read that the stroke took away that means of expression - very rough
Reading philosophy text is like inter into jungle , there are no highways no traffic lights no guidance; you have to create your own way own strategy and anything surprising can come on your way, may be good or bad...may break your previous Ideas and may give you new Ideas......and there is no way coming back to same position where you did start journey.
Thanks for the tips. They are helpful in reading Aristotle
Glad to read it
Well, I would suggest not trying to start with Heidegger then, and to go back to some of the great ancient, medieval, and modern thinkers for some time. Heidegger is presuming some knowledge of those people. You might actually discover you like one of them -- and get so much out of them -- that you don't miss the Heidegger!
Yes, it is. Fortunately, I get pretty good participation out of my present students at Marist
Thanks, I'm glad you enjoy the videos. Yes, I think that could be a good DSCT video idea. I think you're right that there's been greater interest in his philosophy as of late.
Hi Professor,
What was your first philosophical text that got you into philosophy?
I'm an undergraduate philosophy student and found this really helpful. It is a very good video, thank you so much.
+Kp tee Glad it was useful for you!
Same!
Before you grew your philosopher beard.
Indeed.
You're very welcome! Glad you liked it
2) You have a student who is very actively participating -- and often gets the material much more quickly than the others -- and they are so quick to respond, to post, to answer questions, etc. that they end up "ahead of tempo", so to speak, and the other students end up feeling sort of dampered. Now, if the rest of the students are lackadaisical, not really contributing, etc., it seems to me it's more their fault than the go-getter's
I'm going over Mortimer J. Adler's reading list in "How to read a book" I think it is a good list. I am a fan of the "great book" approach to education.
There are many lists out there. Have fun with yours
@@GregoryBSadler what is your opinion on Adler?
@@johnmanole4779 Nowhere near my favorites
And YESS!!! My professor always thanked me after class for such depth and participation in class! Learning… an education… is now of such a high value to me that I treasure every moment in the seat.
That’s awesome!
One of the best of your videos and very helpful. I still want more Plato.
Well. . . . I'll be always be doing more Plato. But, you do have admit, I've got quite a few videos about his works up at this point
First philosophical book I read on my own was Plato Republic in highschool-All I got were a bunch of weird looks or people thinking it was a book about actually silly putty plato
There are so many great books out there. How much time does it take to investigate some book? For example, I recently discovered russian philosopher Berdyaev; his article "On suicide" is such a great text, the problem is one can write a book on every paragraph in it. I'm in temptation to read it few more times, and it's ok, it's only some 20 pages. But when I read it, lets say 5 times, i read 100 pages - A short novel. And that's only an article, what to do with, for example, Schopenhauers "World as will and representation"? How to reread some text so many times and read other books too? How to concentrate so much on only one book and read some other books there are to be read, especially when that book is huge? Can one reread some book slowly and read some new text at the same time or should he stay with some work till he understand it as much as he can at the time?
There's no one-size-fits-all approach to the questions you're asking. Different books are different, and some readers find different approaches fruitful.
I know I can read multiple books at one time. But that's me. I don't know whether you'll find reading more than one book at a time productive or not. You'll have to figure that out
I usually read multiple books at one time, but until now I reread some book only after two or three years since the last reading. However, it seems to me your approach could be very fruitful for me. Thanks for your advices :)
I think you touch on an important point here: that there are at once ideas which we wish to "transport" out of these texts but also a certain historical rootedness in which we find them; as you say, the "worlds of Plato, Augustine, Aquinas, Kierkegaard, etc." I have in mind here something like the challenge of Derrida who says that each structure must have a "genesis," and that this in turn must be understood in order to grasp how the structure functions.
I would also like to say that you should not read it like you would a normal book. If you're on page 150 and you don't get it then you need to back to page 1. In my experience the most important thing in reading philosophy is being able to follow the authors train of thought. That means trying to grasp the text sentence by sentence and using the dictionary EVERY TIME you don't understand a word. If you do this I think you will find Heidegger is very literal with his word selections.
Love, love Spinoza
20:40 questions to ask yourself while reading
@jclibertad Thanks! Made this one on the fly to help out the students a bit
Professor, how could we differentiate between Plato’s and Socrates’s opinions? Is there any way?
A number of ways, none of which are entirely agreed upon. That's called the "Socratic problem". Not something I really worry about these days - but can easily search it
After subscribing, I have found more and more of your videos. This video is in the top 5 from you. I wish I had found your videos upon entering into Applied Ethics. Your “closer and closer” example was so accurate. I had not realized this would be enthralling. I found “read your text several times before class” (not verbatim) to be so useful! Even though I’ve maintained an A in philosophy classes…. You’ve really helped me achieve a next level experience with Philosophy. Being able to pass a course is one thing, understanding the context of what you read is another. Thanks Professor!
I'm glad that this video, and the others, have been useful for you!
Fantastic words of wisdom here!
Glad you enjoyed it
I was just thinking about this last night: not only in lectures but also in movies and shows, after watching them multiple times, my views on certain characters completely change. It's like gaining a deeper level of understanding and clarity. That's why I like to document everything that resonates with me my thoughts, conclusions, and insights and rewatch everything to uncover new layers each time.
Good rich works have that capacity to reveal more and more with each reading
I really appreciate your content, this video in particular! I've recently started reading philosophy and was initially discouraged, as I often found the meaning of texts difficult to discern. I've continued to read despite the frustration this causes, but have found that although I actively engage with the ideas of the texts' during lectures, I still struggle with fully grasping them as I read. I'm hoping this happens less frequently as I continue to read new works. Thank you again for your content! It's always very helpful and the quality far exceeds that of other creators on youtube.
I expect that it will happen less frequently as you keep on reading new texts. And remember, if you don't get it the first time around, that's to be expected
Hahaha -- you might have missed it
I'm 30 and just getting into philosophy I'm reading Meditations by Aurelius. I know it's "easy" but still difficult for me
+beau crory That's all right -- "easy" and "difficult" are relative, not absolute, terms. Most of the texts I teach aren't all that easy for my students. . . .
the video is very good
You're welcome. Glad you found it useful
I'm so glad I found your channel! Can't wait to watch all your videos. I want to embark in reading the great works of philosophy!
I just completed my first pass through Epictetus' Discourses and I feel just as you described first readings usually make one feel (I think I got this part, these all sound like he's saying the same thing, no idea what he's saying here) and I'm glad to hear that repeated readings do elucidate more of what the writer is going for.
On a first or second read through do you tend to try all of the comprehension questions you describe here? (What's being said? Who's saying it? Why say this? What could've been said instead?) Or do you tend to focus on certain ones for certain read throughs?
I've said a few times now, but as a self-studying would-be philosopher your page is a real treat. Thank you.
+TheOSullivanFactor I don't myself use those questions when I'm reading. But that's because I tend to do those out of habit, implicitly
Very good core concepts that I needed to be reminded of. I purchased a set of the Britannica Great Books of the Western world and being seventy and retired I have some time to absorb the ideas. Your guidance is appreciated, thank you
Glad it was useful for you!
Thank you for this, i was thinking i was too slow for philosophy!! :)))
I think a lot of people have that view about themselves, not least because philosophical texts are indeed difficult, but a lot of teachers stress the difficulties, rather than help learners make their way through them
I'm not American neither from the UK I learned English by my self also I can't even buy philsophical books they are not available in my country so I turned to pdf files, I wish u have a method for this kind of situation. Also looking at the screen for long time burns my eyes so I'm curious what you can suggest, and thx for your ATP.
Those are other problems than the video is focused on
maybe you could print the texts?
I tried note taking Nietzsche and comparing what i thought with spark notes and i wanted to punch myself in the head with frustration)))) the same with Dantes inferno, it was a perpetual wait what.
Keep at it, and it gets better
Professor, how would you respond to someone who says, “everything is relative.”?
Well, there's a straightforward quip to that: "how about that statement"?
I started to read some philosophical articles which are assembled in an introduction to philosophy book and they are organised in way that shows you a core philosophical concept as being truth, then the next articles critique this concept and show its flaws. This kind of assembly helped me as a beginner student in being very careful about whether to follow any philosopher just because his work makes sense. Thus, do you find it better that after reading several texts of a certain philosopher to go and find works that critique these texts?
It certainly doesn't hurt to do so
I see that these are your hippie days.
You see that those were years past when I let my hair down, you mean. Check the date
@TheBmo4538 You mean "on", right?
I generally reply to comments. Kinda my thing
Hi Gregory. Do you have any lectures on Merleau Ponty?
No, not at this time. Best way to see what I do have is to go to my channel, and look through the playlists. Right now, I've got more than 400 vids
Thanks I like the fact that you take the time to make these. Your concept of reading and thinking, as you describe there, is close to the studying music or even taste. I like that view.
Glad you enjoyed the video and my approach
Excellent video.
Glad you enjoyed it!
That's too bad. It's unfortunate for teachers when their students do not participate--particularly for philosophy teachers, I'd think.
Greg, does it ever annoy teachers when a student participates too much? I took an ethics class last semester and enjoyed it a lot, however the other students seldom participated and, not wanting to monopolize discussion, I often held back my own comments and questions.
Hello Dr. Sadler, I love all your videos, i think they are highly educational and informative. I did have a question which might serve as a great topic for a chalk and talk perhaps. You mention in this video "How to read a philosophical text", that your not a big fan of Spinoza. Question: What elements of Spinoza's philosophy do you agree/disagree with?
I've recently noticed a renaissance in Spinoza and his philosophy and I would very much like to know what your thoughts on this topic. Thanks.
Thank you so much for all your great videos! I wish I could take one of your courses!
+EnzoDiPasta You're welcome! Well, if you'd like to take a course, I do teach online courses, with the Global Center for Advanced Studies, and (coming soon) through my company, ReasonIO
Ha, I'm half way through reading Plato's symposium.
It's like watching masters of a bitchfest competition, I've been laughing through most of it and wonder if it's just me, or do the experts react the same?
I'd have no idea what a "bitchfest competition" is supposed to be, so I couldn't say. The participants in the dialogue are certainly joking around with each other
Gregory B. Sadler how about a handbag fight, or a battle rap, rather than 'bitchfest competition'?
All of the above but, of a standard that I've not seen before, frigging hilarious. :D
Wtf Scully Not ringing any bells.
Gregory B. Sadler I may try to better explain it someday, I'm sure you're a busy man and I don't want to waste your time.
In short:
I've watched films and listened to (I'm not much of a reader) a lot of old stories from around those times and often wondered why so many of the people are portrayed as so serious, it's as if most back then have a total lack of humor and I don't think they did.
Because of the way I was reading the symposium, to me a modernised comparison would be a rap battle etc.
You are an expert and I know nothing so I may be dead wrong, I'm glad you said they were joking around, at least I realized that much.
Wtf Scully Aha! I would say a modernized version would be a dinner party, among friends who do engage in a good bit of joking with each other. Antagonism is just a side-show, though, not the main point. The point is to give a speech about Love, and that's what most of the participants do, each drawing on their own skills, background, capacities, etc.
Very helpful. Thank you.
+Soren BFG You're welcome!
480p, we meet again!
Yes, that was pretty common back then
Thanks for making this!
Very Well done!
You're welcome -- glad you found it useful
I worked in Bay's Used Book store in Sudbury Ontario ( a university town) for a total of about 8 years. I got to see what people really read, what the fads are....and built a library of classic texts for a cheap price. When I read Plato I see Thrasymachus in Socrates face.( I'll wipe the snot off of it for you....) And oddly, I can identify with both characters. The debate is a real one regarding the nature of power, and the prescriptions of happiness. When lifting weights, the best thing is to give it a day to heal, and go back at it. I need to dwell on the wisest texts of both the Eastern and Western traditions...but I feel like I am getting stiffer, and not so subtle in picking up small and new insights that grow into more interconnections...holy crap....14:11 theres epectasis , or "achilles and the Tortoise". got to go....
+Mark Trumble I think that's a sign of both a good author and a good reader - that possibility of identifying with both opposed characters.
I decided to start reading Nietzsche and started originally with Thus Spoke, but now switched to Beyond Good and Evil. My question is the following: Is it a good idea to approach the same book in two different languages? I got a hard copy of Beyond Good and Evil in English and a PDF in Spanish.
Sure - it's always interesting to compare the choices made by translators
This is the only method and this is what Hegel said in his introduction to Science of Logic.....
What a head of hair!
Way to focus on what's important there
Hi proffesor, I am currently studying to be a foreing languages teacher but i am deeply interested in philosophy and i dont get as many philosophy courses in my University as I would like to, so I was looking for some self- teaching advice and that led me to find your content (wich is really helpful, by the way) and while I was watching your video I was wondering. how important would you say it is to read philosophical texts in their original languages? Should I definitley learn greek, german, french etc.? Did you do that when you were starting your studies? Maybe not when you were starting but later on?
Big thanks for the content.
It certainly helps to be able to read in the original, but it's not necessary
Thank you for this video! Greetings from Colombia :)
You're welcome!
I'm "seconding" the many complimentary comments here, Dr. Sadler. Extremely informing and easy to listen to. I also enjoy your tone.
Glad you enjoy the discussion!
I just need to learn how to read this book I picked up.
Hi Dr Sadler I recently acquired a hungry appetite for philosophy & am planning on reading many different texts. I have read some Nietzsche and some eastern texts but nothing else. I was wondering if you'd recommend a linear progression from ancient to modern or a more scattered approach to reading philosophical writings? Thanks in advance
I generally advise starting with Plato -- but that's just me
Thank you, Dr. This is the best description on how to read philosophy that I've found. I guess mentioning reading something over and over again is a sign that I'm not necessarily an idiot. 😁
Pretty much all classic works will yield more the more you stick with them
Do you have any specific advice for reading Kant. I have just started with the Critique of pure reason, and after looking up on the net, I figured that reading the Prolegomena along with it would help me understand it better. But it seems as I move forward with it, the less I seem to understand.
The dryness of the work does not put me off, its the depth and sheer number of concepts that Kant constructs that I fail to grasp in all there entirety, and I am not even halfway through the book!!
And Instead of reading the whole book again and again to gain a deeper understanding as you say , I tend to break it into smaller sections and work with each section again and again till I understand it completely and then move forward to the next section.
Thanks.
It's quite all right with lengthy works to break them into sections (usually the author has done that), and work your way through them -- also to review a section. Keep in mind that my advice here was for whom? My students who would be reading perhaps 20-50 pages of a work at a time (e.g. one book of Plato's Republic).
Kant is admittedly quite tough. To understand him, it helps to have a strong background in thinkers that came before him, and to understand his own terminology
Well, you certainly didn't pick the easiest text! It is a tough one, and you shouldn't feel bad about being lost.
I'm going to shoot some videos in the Existentialism series on Being and Time in the next several months.
How do you find the balance between reading primary texts(actual text) and secondary texts(ranges from basic 'Routledge' text guidebooks to research papers/commentaries)? I presume that the former is prioritised to the latter, but when/how do you use the latter as means to understanding the former ?
I don't really worry about such a balance -- secondary literature (to which I myself contribute, on some thinkers) is not of the same level of value as primary texts, or rather, when it is, it's because it becomes its own new primary text.
If secondary lit is helpful for understanding a given author or text, then great, read it if you like, or not. If it's not, or is off-base. . . well, you'll only really know that by knowing the primary material well.
I find myself returning to Dr. Sadler's videos. Thank you for sharing your excellent work, Dr. Sadler!
You're very welcome!
Greg you really nailed it, especially for the older learner. Back in prehistoric times when phones had rotary dials I came home from my all expenses paid tour of S.E. Asia and I decided to go back to school. One of my instructors (Alvin Badeaux of Badeaux Engineering) told his class 'now you are trying to take all of the technical classes you can, but ten years from now you will wish you had taken management classes and finally later in your career you will wish you had taken liberal arts courses' ... how right he was. A few years ago I acquired (a story in itself) the 54 volume set of Britannica's Great Books and I have tried to work through the ten year reading program. It has been a struggle . Your lectures are a great help. Thanks again.
That is a great line by that instructor! Glad the lectures have been useful in your studies
Great stuff professor and I loved how you related lifting weights (GAINS!) to the discussion. I really appreciate that you upload all these great videos onto here. Thank you
Really insightful. Opened my view about reading not only philospihcal texts, but any good text.
Glad you found it useful!
It's very cool that we get content like this on the Internet! What a time to be alive. Thank you for your work! :) All the best to you!
You're very welcome!
Thank you professor, I wish there was a cabinet position created for you. i.e.: secretary of philsophy , you would be excellent.
+Adrienne Traisman Hahaha! That would be an interesting job. You're welcome!
If some people spend their lives reading great philosophers and they keep discovering new meanings, does that mean that those great philosophers were vastly more brilliant than even some of the more intelligent people alive?
Probably not. I wouldn’t worry about trying to compare “brilliance”
@@GregoryBSadler Hello. Thanks for the response! :) Yes, I agree that it's a better use of time to think about the content of the books and not wonder about how brilliant someone was, but I'm curious now: what else could be the reason for this?
@@manafro2714 Good research project for you to work on
@@GregoryBSadler :D That's a polite way of saying "Go figure it out yourself!"
I first found you while reading Plato's Republic. Then as a self proclaimed "life long learner", I read Thomas Jefferson: The Art of Power. The book drove me to Locke and from my Studies of Locke I realized I wanted and needed a greater semi structured course on Philosophy. Thank you for posting these!
You're welcome!
Thank you for this.i am not from philosophy discipline but i am really interested in philosophy and your videos are helping me a lot.
You're welcome - glad they're helpful!
platos symposium - which is the best version/book to buy? there are many on amazon...i'd like the most original version - I found: Symposium by Plato (Author)
but surprisingly only 7 reviews so not sure if this is the best starting point.
thanks =)
No idea. I generally don't worry much about translations, since I can just go to the original, if I want to know precisely what's being said. So I'm not a good guide for that.
Mkay thanks anyway :)
Sir, my math is not good. do you think I can still study philosophy ? how much maths is in philosophy?
Reading and reasoning is more important than mathematics for philosophy
A couple basic questions that spring up: Over the span of time that you're reading a text, do you focus solely on that reading for that span of time or do you have multiple philosophy texts you read over any given duration? And also when do you feel satisfied to move away from a text and start another, especially if the next is related in some way to the current text?
Good question. So, if you're asking me personally, I've usually got a number of books open at any given time, but I don't really see that as a good thing to do!
So, when do you feel it's time to move from one text to the next? There's no hard and fast rule for that -- I suppose it depends on what you aim to get out of the texts -- and keep in mind, you can always go back to a text
The proper way to read a philosophical text is to tear it apart 😬
Good luck with that
It does -- though I ought to point out that some profs can be annoyed over very small issues!
I'd say that in my view, it can happen in two ways:
1) you get a student who has a high level of participation (and this sticks out even more if the others aren't really participating), and that student makes the participation primarily about themselves, their interests, their views, etc.
[continued]
@crimsonsamuraiftw Yes, that is a good analogy. There's been some talk lately about using video games as a metaphor for education, which has a certain merit to it. I suppose we might talk about certain passages as being like "boss levels", and the like
Thanks for your reply
Doing philosophy requires self-confidence. How else could you think to argue with Socrates? Explicitly put my question is:
How can we really trust our own reason? (Obviously I'm speaking of myself ^^")
Well, if you can't trust your own, you've got a few options. One is just to place your trust in someone else's reason. Another is to just give up. Another is to strengthen your own rational faculities
@@GregoryBSadler Unless I'm underestimating the scope of what you mean by "rational faculties" you are not addressing my point. What if the problem is psychological?
Find a good therapist, I suppose.
I did address your point. Wouldn't waste my scarce time responding if I didn't
Great advices!
Thank you.
You're welcome
I've been wondering about the dialogue of Plato's about friends (I don't remember if it is Lysis or not). I read that, but I didn't really agree with any of the lines of reasoning about why we have friends. Can you give any insight on the topic of friends, from a philosophical standpoint, and on what is intended to be inferred from Plato's dialogue on concerning friendship?
I'd suggest you watch my videos -- in the Intro to Philosophy and in the Plato playlists -- which deal with the Lysis
Gregory B. Sadler Oh! I didn't see them. Thanks! I've actually started watching your videos, from oldest to newest, in order. I'm going to watch them all, except for the ones that don't really pertain to my interests.
hey proffesor i am from assam in north east india. i have a question.what is the difference between platos communism and modern communism.what does modern communism means. in what context it is asked and what is the value of this question.
I would take a look at Plato's Republic and at Marx and Engel's Communist Manifesto. Differences should be readily apparent.
The way it's prhased this sounds very much like an exam or homework question
thats right it is exam question thanks professor sadler.how to read theories in an intresting manner.how to think about the conditions in which these philosophers lived
i just watched this video… yeah, a bit late… but am now wondering if my study of Hegel’s Phenomenology of spirit might benefit from me reading through The WHOLE thing and then start over with your Half Hour Hegel series… have been tempted to read ahead, but thought it would be futile. (LOL) eager to read your comment. thanks for all you do
Well, I think with Hegel, yes, reading ahead without having read the stuff before it is likely to be rather confusing
thanks for that confirmation. :)