Hello!
I’m a 14 year old looking to enter the world of philosophy, and i was wondering where i should start. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
i was thinking along the lines of a website or book with good philosophy info.
Remember that you become a philosopher when you can think critically about difficult issues which interest you, but of course it helps to have a look at other people’s ideas to get you started.
Have a browse through Amazon.co.uk’s philosophy section for some good books. Apparently “The Young People’s Guide to Philosophy” by Jeremy Weate provides an overview of the most significant philosophers through history and describes what their ideas were, yet manages to avoid being patronising. It has some very good reviews so might be worth a look.
If you really start to get into philosophy, it might be worth reading a more academic intro to problematic issues. Try Thomas Nagel’s “What Does it All Mean?” which is very clearly written and even better, very thin. However, be warned: though Nagel writes accessibly, he is dealing with heavyweight stuff - you may find that there are some sections you need to read 2 or 3 times before you get what he is saying. Unless you are the next Wittgenstein, of course 
I have told an adult who wanted to get into philosophy to start reading a good intro to philosophy book. This will give you an orientation to philosophy. I have heard good things about Simon Blackburn’s book (“Think”). Another way to introdue yourself to philosophy by first thinking about what kinds of subjects interests you and then you can read the pertinent philosophy books. For instance, if you are interested in the concept of justice, you could start with Plato’s Republic and then there would be an entire series of texts that would follow that.
Of course, the best way to learn philosophy is to read the primary texts. Although you might get lost at times and you will not have a great historical introduction, reading the primary texts also give you the most satisfaction. I would stay away from contemporary Anglo-American, Continental, and even modern philosophy for the reason that these texts tend to be highly technical and with very difficult terminology. I suggest reading the dialogues of Plato (Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Meno, Symposium, etc). The dialogues give you a great introduction to the many issues philosophers discuss. But more importantly, Plato’s dialogues will give you a great introduction to the method of questioning, i.e., the method of the philosopher.
Finally, if I can be so bold, I wanted to leave you a quote that shows what philosophy is and how impressive it is for you, at a young age, to want to study philosophy. The quote is by the great Martin Heidegger.
“Philosophy, then, is not a kind of knowledge which one could acquire directly, like vocational and technical expertise, and which, like economic and professional knowledge in general, one could apply directly and evaluate according to its usefulness in each case… (Instead) Philosophy is questioning about the extra-ordinary. Yet as we merely intimated at first, this questioning recoils upon itself, and thus not only what is asked about is extradordinary, but also the questioning itself. This means that this questioning does not lie alone our way, so that one day we stumble into it blindly or even by mistake. Nor does it stand in the familar order of the everyday, so that we could be compelled to it on the ground of some requirements or even regulations. Nor does this questioning lie in the sphere of urgent concern and the satisfaction of dominant needs. The questioning itself is out of order. It is completely voluntary, fully and especially based on the mysterious ground of freedom, on what we have called the leap. The same Nietzsche says: ‘Philosophy…means living volunatarily amid ice and mountain ranges’. Philosophizing, we can now say, is extra-ordinary questioning about the extra-ordinary”.
-Heidegger, “Introduction to Metaphysics”
stop. ignore everyone who tells you to go out and read a certain book they recommend. just sit down and think. this process could take days or even longer but it will be rewarding. contemplate anything you want, anything that comes into your head. then the right books will find you. you will just notice them on shelves or on amazon. you will suddenly think “hey, that’s a damn good idea that just popped into my head, i wonder if anyone else had it” and go looking.
the most important thing to realise, (and this is somethink i only realised in the last few days) is that you must not allow the ideas of others to override your own, do not believe something just because someone else does.
now read this post again, until the contradictions sort themselves out.
Philosophy is ilke a big cloud which casts its shadow over all things. The cloud being you, and specifically, your thoughts. HVD is right.
… and just to perfect the pretentious metaphor - be warned! the cloud may turn to water, and (if you’re powerful) maybe even rain !
whatever anyone says. hvd is right.
remembering of course that you must not believe what anyone says, so ultimately, HVD is also wrong. And so am I.
Without wishing to be biased or anything, but this website is ideal for people wishing to get into philosophy. Some of the more ‘hardcore’ philosophers tend to use complicated terminology and sentence structures which require a few re-reads before understanding. However, this site hosts some of the most intelligent contemporary philosophers in the world*. These forums are ideal for bouncing off ideas you may have and listening to other people’s view on things.
I’m not sure I agree with Heidegger who seems to be saying that Philosophy is on another level to life. Philosophy, for me, has always been the label to the questioning of life and everything in it. A lot of people will never “study philosophy” in the way that we are but they will question things in life, some more than others. Philosophy is just an extension to that but I do not think one can separate it. Perhaps I have misunderstood what Heidegger was alluding to.
The books I read to introduce me to Philosophy were Philosophy:The Basics by Nigel Warburton and Sophie’s World by Josteein Gaarder (both of which can be found in the links section of this site). Once you have learnt the basics, be careful not to buy “novelty philosophy books” like “101 philosophy problems” which are basically coffee table reads. Some books will be complicated but perservere and you will reap the benefits. Since starting my “philosophy career” i’ve begun to read more books in other areas notably science and mathematics.
Good to have you with us Slartibartfast (I have the H2G2 trilogy!), hope you’ve found this thread helpful.
*note: this may or may not be true
okay, thanks everyone for your input.
First, I’m glad that we all could give Slartibartfast some input.
Now to those other post.
I wasn’t trying to tell Slartibartfast what to do, which is something that you all seemed to conclude from what I said. I suggested that Slartibartfast read Plato for the reason that the dialogues are a great way to introduce one to the great themes of philosophy. I never meant to say that Slartibartfast should read Plato because it is the “truth”. My point is that if a person wants to be introduced to philosophy and an exampe of how a philosopher thinks methodologically, then Plato is great way to see this. Of course he doesn’t have to agree with Plato, and I don’t agree with Plato. However of all the primary texts in the history of philosophy, Plato’s dialogues have a great flare to them and are enjoyable.
Now to the charge that I or others are trying to tell Slartibartfast what Slartibartfast must believe, I was not doing that and that was never my intention. I was only offering a recommendation. Of course I was not saying to Slartibartfast that my take on philosophy is correct or that the philosophers in the history of philosophy are always correct. The point of including Heidegger’s quote is the very simple point that philosophy is pure and simply thinking. All too often, people think that philosophy is a rigid set of ideas, a set collection of theories, or a fixed list of books. Instead what Heidegger is saying, and what I believe as well, is that philosophy is the ability to question so that we can put ourselves in the position to learn and think. Philosophy books and all of our posts at “I love Philosophy” are merely attempts at thinking.
Finally, I included Heidegger’s quote as a way to compliment Slartibartfast for his interest in this endeavor, as well to compliment you all. The reason is that philosophy is not an ordinary activity. Instead the very act of philosophy is extra-ordinary and that it is never something a person stumbles upon but takes a conscious leap.
Finally to Ben, I interpret Heidegger differently. Philosophy can be considered different from life in the sense that for most of the time people do not question things and think about life. The ordinary person does not think and question on a daily basis, as a philosopher or a poet does. But it is when in times of anxiety, boredom, love, and death when the oridinary person come to ask questions about life and move beyond the ordinary. Heidegger’s point is that when we do think the big questions, we are moving beyond the orindary non-critical or not-asking questioning mode of life to the extra-ordinary and becoming thinkers. So in one sense, a person who comes to question is above and beyond the ordinary way of life because the ordinary life does not think and question on a daily basis. However when a person takes the extraordinary of thinking and questioning, he/she remains anchored within everyday life. The only difference is that the person who takes this leap has a heightened awareness or consciousness about life. Thus philosophy is necessarily integrated within the world and our lives in this world.
I’ve also noticed that what turns most people off is the tough language. Many times I have found myself wondering what the hell is going on, but I force myself to learn. I think if someone is really interested in philosophy they need to have patience. What got me interested in philosophy was my interest in learning Logic. I stepped away from logic and concentrated on learning philosophy, and now I wished I didn’t.
[/quote]
As a way to begin, there is no substitute for working your way through at least two major ‘Introduction to Philosophy’ textbooks Go to anyone of a number of major academic textbook publishers’ websites and find your way to philosophy and to the intro to philosophy section. Pick a text of two, find texts that are in a later than second edition if possible. Obtain them, and go through them. Having done that you will be able to begin considering some primary sources, but not before.
If you start right in with the original sources you must first try to understand what point they are making, and then you can think about it. Let an experienced instructor who has written a textbook save you a good deal of time with this understanding attempt. There will be plenty of time for original thought after you have profited from the efforts of others.
There is real ground to be gained in philosophical inquiry. There is no reason not to speed things up by reading textbooks written by those who have already covered some of the ground and who know how to present the stuff in ways that are clearer than the originators of the views/ideas/arguments own presentations.
One clear kind of knowledge of philosophy is knoweldge of what others have what others have already said about particular issues.
Slade Dupree
I think textbooks and institutionalised learning methods are quite possibly the worst ways of learning that I have ever come across. They generalise their readers and force them through fixed ways of gaining knowledge. What you want for philosophy the ability to think for yourself in an open minded manner to gain wisdom. And this is pretty much the exact opposite of knowledge. You can know all the famous philosophical ideas in the world and not have a clue to find out your own. Formal education is perhaps the worst thing that has ever happened in my whole life.
I agree with HVD and pangloss. Find some time to sit down and observe. Relax yourself and absorb everything around you and more and more, things will start to understand themselves.
However if you enjoy learning from books and courses, do it. But bear in mind how you will learn if you don’t do enough of your own thinking. It does have its advantages, such as inspiring you and giving u ideas about what to think about. But I still recommend self-learning most, at least to begin with.
Ya’ know, it was for me too. But I think the reasons why were symptomatic of other problems during my youth that interfered with what potential there was for me to take advantage of the formal education in a progressive way. Use it as a benefit and not, as the rebelious punk kid I was liked to think, as a horrible waste of time.
The greatest thing about any kind of formal education is the fact that it provides a structure which allows learning to advance at a faster rate. This is done through repetition and routine making “learning” a form of exercise which results in faster growth. Organization and practice- one graduates from consumer mathematics into algebra more efficiently if there is direction and control. Studying it “on your own time” as a hobby probably wouldn’t produce the same results as a structured and intensive program demanding more time and commitment. Specialization, that’s what formal education is.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not glorifying “formal education.” It can be a hindrance for some people, such as myself, who found it more enlightening to stare out of the classroom window while the teacher went on and on about some trivial historical fact from 1264. I’d like to tell the teacher: “look, lady, I’ll make a deal with you. If I ever find myself in a position where I need to know that knowledge, I’ll give you a call. Meanwhile, either send me to the class for the “smart kids,” or call in sick so that gorgeous substitute comes in so I can stare at her instead of the window. Thanks in advance.” No, seriously though. Spontaneity and freedom of thought can be highly productive in learning. Some thinkers become bogged down with the pace that formal education takes, the high structure and limitation denies the potential that one might have. To makes great leaps. A lot of times this potential is not recognized in the individuals and they are not given the opportunity to expand like they could. I have a friend who teaches in an elementary school, who is also a fervid Nietzschean. This is a perfect set up if you ask me. This teacher will have a natural eye for exceptional talent and strength in his students, will support originality and creativity, as well as inspire confidence. This is what we need. We need, and I apologize for putting it this way, a drastic kick in the ass, a more aggresive ethos, or smarter students. Or…Nietzschean teachers.
If you find yourself to be one of those extraordinarily “smart” people, break a few rules now and then, it’s okay. But remember, you’re going to have to make up for “lost time,” so be vigorous in your learning, however you do it.
Most smart people aren’t smart enough to not bluff; but bluffing isn’t something smart people do. Nevermind. To be intelligent is to be prepared to be “called” at any moment in any place with no contingency plan. To be intelligent is to know what you are arguing, the possibility that you may be “wrong,” and as a friend once put it “is to have the ability to switch perspectives,” to know the arguments against oneself. In philosophy there are disciplines that have centuries of accumulation and well defined positions, and often people want to believe that “philosophy” is more of a “free for all” than a collective and extensive trade for/of thinking. Chances are when we have an “original” thought, it is part of a model that, not only has that thought in mind already, but has also incorperated it into a bigger model of coherent thoughts. And this is, by the way, the reason why productive philosophy must have some amount of formality and organization, not to common for radical and independent thinkers who want a “free for all.”
F**k it, I say drop out of school. I did. I’m not to shabby on the “intelligent” part but I will say that I don’t make good money with an imaginary degree. College, had fate put me there, might have landed me 50 to 100 grand a year. But then I wouldn’t be the person I am now(roughly speaking), so I wouldn’t want to change things. “I’m smart, I’m funny, and dog-gon-it, people like me”- Stewart Small (I think it was)
I’m not that impressed, I became interested in real philosophy at around 14, and I know a couple of 14 year old starting to get into philosophy now too. Before then I didn’t really know what philosophy was. But from an early age I would sit around thinking about philosophical ideas (I just didn’t know they were philosophical back then), as well as normal ideas. Probably sparked because of the books on science my parents gave and read to me, and we watched the Quantum (Catalyst has taken its place) and documentaries on TV (often left me awed and curious to learn more about the world).
Anyway, what the others are saying is right. Think about ‘stuff’ first, then go and find works relevant to what you were thinking about, read them, and think some more!
And those beginners guides are good too.
Kind of like I said earlier, a lot of people like philosophy, but they don’t know that it is philosophy. The word has a stigma to it.