Richard Tarnas: Recommend a Good Historical Introduction to Philosophy?

[Textcritic]

Hey.

I have been reading Richard Tarnas's The Passion of the Western Mind: Understanding the Ideas That Have Shaped Our Worldview, and was told by a friend of mine who is also a graduate philosophy student that it is a fairly poor introductory text for the history of philosophy. I haven't had any philosophy courses since undergrad (don't ask how long ago that was!), and I fear that my own philosophical expertise is not sufficient enough to make a good evaluation (It does seem to me that he makes some fairly broad generalizations and unwarranted leaps to conclusions). I would appreciate a good critique of the book from anyone who has ever read it, as well as a recommendation for an alternative read.

Thoughts?

[amorak]

I like bananas.

[jammies]

I haven't read that, but I have read How to Think About the Great Ideas, which I thought was well-written. Obviously it doesn't go into a lot of detailed analysis, but as a broad overview and guide it is fine.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Why read a book when you have access to CP and more importantly Peter12?

[northcrunk]

This is a good introduction to Philosophy, I used something similar in PHI 1101 at Mt.Royal. This one is called problems from philosophy

http://www.mcgraw-hill.co.uk/html/007338660X.html

[amorak]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Why read a book when you have access to CP and more importantly Peter12?

Which old poster are you again...The one with the Simpsons love, I can't remember the name.... (sorry to OT the OP).

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Why read a book when you have access to CP and more importantly Peter12?

I think peter12 realized that hanging out at sketchy bars on the weekends picking up drunk, uninhibited women beats hell out of posting on CP about philosophy. All those years his girlfriend was holding him back!

[peter12]

I did bugger off for a bit. No offense. Women (kinda) and PhD applications have kept me busy.

Recommendation? Read the best books and leave the summaries for Bertrand Russelites. Never save yourself the trouble of reading through the classics IF that is what you really want. Otherwise, I'd recommend just picking a philosopher or two and reading up on them.

I suppose it depends on your interests and all, etc... There are a lot of fine books written for a larger audience. Here's my personal favourite written by one of the thinkers I emulate in many ways.

http://www.amazon.ca/Closing-America...2457184&sr=8-1

[troutman]

Originally Posted by peter12

Women (kinda)

Sheena's got a wiener?

[Kybosh]

My personal philosophy on philosophy literature:

I think I won't like it, therefore I don't.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by troutman

Sheena's got a weiner?

I see what you did there.

[something]

The notion of an introduction to philosophy is a very general one. Are you interested in a time period? Are you interested in Eastern or Western philosophy? Philosophy is the broadest academic discipline in the world. It is inherent in everything that exists within the realm of our experiences. If you just want a lineage of Western thought, which will cover much, but not everything... try:

http://www.abebooks.com/products/isbn/0155076841

It is a three volume collection, each book about 500 pages. It is nothing more than the excerpted works of various thinkers that have shaped Western thought.

I also recommend "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" as a critique of Western thought.

[peter12]

What I do not like about the summaries is that they have an automatic imposition of the author's bias on what is supposed to be neutral commentary. Readers are fooled into thinking a certain concept, instead of just thinking for themselves. Just go for a polemic or actually read a few of the Old Books.

There are some extraordinarily good commentaries done by the Straussians, and Eric Voegelin, however. If you get Plato's Republic, get the Allan Bloom translation (Strauss' greatest student) for the critical essay following the primary text.

[algernon]

Originally Posted by peter12

What I do not like about the summaries is that they have an automatic imposition of the author's bias on what is supposed to be neutral commentary. Readers are fooled into thinking a certain concept, instead of just thinking for themselves. Just go for a polemic or actually read a few of the Old Books.

There are some extraordinarily good commentaries done by the Straussians, and Eric Voegelin, however. If you get Plato's Republic, get the Allan Bloom translation (Strauss' greatest student) for the critical essay following the primary text.

I'm definitely not a scholarly gent such as yourself, but do you have any principals that you, yourself, take a stand on? I notice that you often reference 'the Classics', but don't often state your own opinion, in your own words.

Maybe there is no such thing as original thought?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by algernon

I'm definitely not a scholarly gent such as yourself, but do you have any principals that you, yourself, take a stand on? I notice that you often reference 'the Classics', but don't often state your own opinion, in your own words.

Maybe there is no such thing as original thought?

Sure, original thought is extremely difficult as it is thought that occurs outside of history; impacting, not being impacted. So, I definitely have principles that I stand on, as I'm not Nietzsche or Plato, but I can read them.

The classics are like the best arguments. It's a canon, which is somewhat imposed, but for good reason, that encapsulates the great conversations that have occured between very great people.

I've seen people mention literature and philosophy together. In my view, they are complementary, but not the same thing. The arts are not philosophical, they have their own brand of greatness.

Oh, right, right. My principles, well, I don't want to go overboard, but I tend to favour virtue over freedom, aristocracy over egalitarianism, and nihilism over liberalism. That sounds silly, but I don't subscribe to any ideological platform, as it's all just too abstract for me. Ultimately, to me, what is important, is an engagement with our emotions and our reason as dictated through the observation of our experiences rather than any grand platform for living life.

[something]

Originally Posted by peter12

What I do not like about the summaries is that they have an automatic imposition of the author's bias on what is supposed to be neutral commentary. Readers are fooled into thinking a certain concept, instead of just thinking for themselves. Just go for a polemic or actually read a few of the Old Books.

There are some extraordinarily good commentaries done by the Straussians, and Eric Voegelin, however. If you get Plato's Republic, get the Allan Bloom translation (Strauss' greatest student) for the critical essay following the primary text.

True, though I should make it known to the OP that the book I suggested is not comprised of summaries, but is simply excerpts of the myriad works that have transformed Western thought.

It might seem quite laborious by how many pages are involved, but each thinker is allotted anywhere between 20 and 50 pages, and can be easily read in a sitting. You will not understand all of them, but a brief context is provided by the editor that does not impose itself on the work itself.

It is true that it only gives a "snapshot" of the authors work, but given your desire for an introduction, this is about as good as it will get from my experience.

As an addition to Plato's republic, I would recommend reading some of the Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire, Montesquieu, Rousseau. Also, Locke, Nietzsche, Paine, Sartre are worth a look. Research authors, and knowing what interests you, select a compelling work and just read through it.

Oh, and Aristotle was bestowed the title of father of Western thought - for good reason. Might want to check him out as well.

[Flash Walken]

I like T.Paine.

[algernon]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I like T.Paine.

Is that the monster that unleashed the auto-tune app upon us?
You might as well like Hitler.