Reddit reviews A New History of Western Philosophy

Nah, Russell was somewhat biased and did interpret a lot of philosophers just wrong. Also, he smears his positivist opinion all over the place. Anthony Kenny's [A New History of Western Philosophy] (https://www.amazon.com/New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1500643240&sr=8-1&keywords=a+new+history+of+western+philosophy) fits you way better.

As with all thoughts, there will always be people who co-opt them for their own ends, regardless of the actual substance of them. Both Capitalism and Communism were/are exploited to enrich very few despite promising prosperity for all. All religions have been abused in so many ways to justify so many atrocities throughout history. Monarchism, Feudalism, Racism, Sexism, Fascism, Anti-Semitism, and so on. Even ideologies which focus entirely on freedom like Libertarianism or Anarchism can and have been used to control and manipulate.

​

Social Constructivism is an idea. It's a theory that attempts to explain aspects of human societies and behaviours. It is used by stupid people stupidly, and smart people smartly. It can be used to control or free people. It seems to be an inevitable aspect of human nature to tend towards oppressive hierarchy. It takes concious effort to fight it. That is what these people, for the most part, believe they are doing. And, if we're being honest with ourselves here, they actually are. They have the stats to prove that these negative outcomes are ongoing even in rich developed Western countries. You say that they are deliberately employing a divide-and-conquer strategy as if they are waging a war on everyone else. As if it's you and them. But it isn't. All they want is a good and just society, which I think is something you want too. I know I do.

​

The French revolutionary philosophers, along with British ones, together formed the rights-based natural-law freedom-focused philosophy that founded the United States and dominates the Anglosphere, and the rest of the Western World. It is a rich and varied body of work I'd encourage you to look into since you seem quite interested in it. Here's some good starting points: Jean-Jaques Rousseau, and this is the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on Positive and Negative Freedom. The latter is excellent and has articles on everything you can think of. A really good book is a New History of Western Philosophy by Anthony Kenny. If you can only read one thing, read that. It's like 1000 pages but it breezes by; his style is so good and engaging. The reasons why these ideas came about was in the pursuit of freedom. Even Marx. He and Adam Smith were actually very much cut from the same cloth. It's all very interesting.

​

China is not as monolithic or united as you seem to think it is. It has suffered and continues to suffer from frequent unrest and dissent. We rarely hear about it over here in the West. But remember: everyone in China is basically just like you. The country is as mixed as you'd expect over 1.5bn people to be, it's just relatively cut-off from the rest of the world.

​

​

Allora vai su /r/askphilosophy e nelle faq troverai molti link interessanti, tra cui un manuale consigliato. Penso sia quello di Kenny.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/comments/4ifqi3/im_interested_in_philosophy_where_should_i_start

In generale https://plato.stanford.edu è una risorsa ottima.

Poi comunque dipende da cosa ti interessa di più. Se metafisica, etica, epistemologia o un po' di tutto.

Edit: https://www.amazon.com/New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495/?pldnSite=1

Questo è il manuale.

I'd recommend reading a book on the history of philosophy. That way, you'll have a working understanding of all the major philosophers, and you will probably find someone's philosophy interesting enough to pursue them further. A classic is Samuel Enoch Stumpf's Socrates to Sarte. A friend of mine also recommended a more contemporary book that he said is becoming more standard today. A New History of Western Philosophy by Anthony Kenny.

Other standards works many students start with include Rene Descartes's Meditations on First Philosophy. Also, Plato is a good starting point. The Five Dialogues are some of his earlier works. These include the Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, and Phaedo. I personally started with Plato's Republic, which a former professor informed me that you must read in order to consider yourself educated in today's world (Interestingly enough, he's only ever said that about books he's read).

Anthony Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy is very good. Kenny has compared it to both Russel and Copleston, saying he wanted to be as readable as the former and as accurate as the latter. Each volume is divided into historical survey and analysis. It looks like the one-volume edition is what's currently available.

It does stop in the 1970s, and some have complained that Derrida gets the short shrift. But I found the writing accessible and the work thorough. Augustine and Wittgenstein, in particular, get some very good attention.

Russell's history is great, but Anthony Kenny's updates it for the 21st century:
http://www.amazon.com/A-New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495

Check out Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy, especially book IV, which covers way more of the 20th century than Russell's book.

Sir Anthony Kenny's "A New History of Western Philosophy"

https://www.amazon.com/New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495

In my experience subject histories are a wonderful way to learn the major epochs and gain an deep understanding of historical advancement without focusing solely on dates an events.

> The History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell - You'll learn a lot about how bad ideas never seem to die, but keep coming back. It will also sharpen your logical skills. Poor Nietzsche though.

No, this is a bad recommendation. Russell may have had a few interesting thought but this work of his is troublesomely biased to a number of ideas he did not agree with. His understanding of Kant in particular gets a lot of heat.

Anthony Kenny's "A New History of Western Philosophy" is a far better and more neutral source if you want a survey of western thought.

Perhaps you could start with a historical overview like this one?

What you are referring to is the wild game of connect the dots designed to confirmation bias your cynical assumptions about the world that referred to in another post. If any of that nonsense you just babbled had any truth to it you would revolutionize the oldest field of study in human existence, win a nobel prize, and be rewarded a ton of money. You are simply projecting all around in your last comment and don't know what you are talking about. I suggest you read this 1000+ page book and make it your Bible, that is the only way you will be be woke. You can find it free somewhere I am certain of it.



https://www.amazon.com/New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495


If you insist on being willfully ignorant of the oldest field of study in human existence at least read these Wikipedia articles. Take the red pill and question things.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Formal_fallacies

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases#/search

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

If you ever want to become super rich, famous, and be remembered for the rest of human existence, start writing down your "method" and "system" and publish it. Go down the rabbit hole and stop lying to yourself kid. Be aware of the words you don't know the meaning of in those wiki articles and click on their wiki page. This is EXACTLY what the Wachoski sisters, writer/directors of the Matrix meant when they referred to taking the red pill. Go down the rabbit hole, or wake up tomorrow and forget this conversation ever existed and continue living your life in The Matrix.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Economics/wiki/reading

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskEconomics/comments/5y49nz/as_a_hs_sophomore_i_would_like_to_venture_into/den54ll/

https://www.amazon.com/Law-Legislation-Liberty-statement-principles/dp/0415522293/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8

https://www.amazon.com/Road-Serfdom-Documents-Definitive-Collected/dp/0226320553/ref=la_B000AQ6W60_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503059047&sr=1-1

https://www.amazon.com/Anarchy-State-Utopia-Robert-Nozick/dp/0465051006/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503059077&sr=1-1&keywords=nozick

https://www.amazon.com/Contemporary-Political-Philosophy-Will-Kymlicka/dp/0198782748/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503059099&sr=1-4&keywords=contemporary+political

https://www.amazon.com/New-History-Western-Philosophy/dp/0199656495/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1503059282&sr=1-1&keywords=new+history+of+philosophy

http://econlog.econlib.org/

http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/

I think it's not the best for this particular goal. The section "general introductions" contains a lot of books that are mostly appetizers. If you have already decided to study systematically to build a solid foundation you can downright skip these.

All the books of the other sections are either classics in their own right (therefore, you will study the meat of them in your study of the history of philosophy, and you will do so in the context of what they were replying to, what kind of assumptions they made etc.) or famous but not essential books that have been chosen according to the tastes of the author of the list (therefore you don't need them for foundations; you can always choose to include them in your list if you decide they are valuable in their own right).

So I say skip all the list for now. A much better and much faster way would be to read Anthony Kenny's history of philosophy. If you work through it making sure you understand all the arguments, your focus, thinking, and comprehension skills will already be at another level.

After that, you can start grappling with the Critique of pure reason. Be warned that most of the "introductions", "guides", "explanations" and "companions" to the CPR are actually investigations of obscure points that manage to be harder to read than the actual CPR. The best two books that I found that are actually introductory guides to CPR are this and this.

Despite the titles, they are not "Kant for dummies". They are actually dense expositions which require concentration, familiarity with terms used in philosophy, and knowledge of what came before Kant (both offer a quick overview, but if you don't already know what it's talking about it will just leave you dizzy). Of course, if you have already done step 1, this will be a breeze for you.

I suggest you read both before opening the real CPR, but if you only have patience/time for one: Rosenberg is more one-sided, more focused on certain aspects, and somewhat less clear on some points, but he will really get you excited on what the CPR can mean - it will become a great adventure that could possibly transform your whole understanding of yourself and the universe. Gardner is less exciting, but he is so clear, so exhaustive in predicting what kind of doubt can arise for the reader and in presenting the different interpretations, that it is scary.

I think you are unwisely dismissive of the chronological route.

Placing abstract and difficult ideas in historical context and threading a narrative is a great way to make those ideas more concrete and engaging.

A psychological sense of the historical roots of ones culture is also a fantastic bulwark against feelings of arbitrariness and absurdity of modern life.

I think any discipline, whether philosophy, mathematics, science, engineering or art is only enriched by the chronological approach. History is important and wonderful and learning the history of the development, evolution and progress of culture is a great counterpoint to learning history as one damned atrocity after another.

A book like Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy is big and dense, but not impossible to "conquer". It took me about 6 months to finish. That required a bit of commitment on my part, yes, but don't assume OP is a slacker that can't even commit to such a elementary project as reading through a slightly long book.

There are shorter less dense historical introductions to philosophy too.