Professional Documents
Culture Documents
8/6/16 4:41 pm
Context is king.
The other major hurdle to overcome when trying to get into philosophy is that almost every text was written as a response to
someone else. It can be difficult to understand what someone means, or why they would think a certain thing, if you lack the
context about who they are responding to and the general philosophical climate that they were working in. Without reading
Hobbes, it's hard to understand Rousseau; without reading Rawls, it's hard to understand Nozick; without reading Kant, it's
hard to understand...well, anyone who came after Kant. So many thinkers are so deeply intertwined that its easy to just get
completely lost. Furthermore, a lot of the major philosophical works are written for other philosophers, to convince those
peers of radical new ideas. Something like The Critique of Pure Reason is just not going to be easy to read, really for
anyone. As a beginner, it is almost certainly not worth the effort, but since you have no way of knowing this, you might just
dive in and get discouraged. It is a far better use of time to just use a secondary source, which will often result in a better
understanding of the work anyway.
Even when a work of philosophy doesn't specifically refer to anyone else, it will often use a specialized vocabulary. It is
probably best to learn the definitions (as they are used in philosophy) of the following words: a priori, a posteriori,
deontology, consequentialism, utilitarianism, empiricism, subjective, objective, espistemology, ontology, metaphysics,
aesthetics, metaethics, analytic/synthetic.
http://existentialcomics.com/blog
Page 1 of 5
8/6/16 4:41 pm
Below I've listed many of the major works of philosophy, from those that require a lot of context to understand, to those that
require very little. In addition, I've noted how difficult the texts might be for an amateur, which other philosophers you should
be familiar with beforehand, and included a brief overview. The list is, of course, very incomplete, and additional suggestions
are welcome.
Works which require little to no context:
Meditations on First Philosophy, Rene Descartes.
Difficulty level: easy Introduces methodological skepticism to modern philosophy (much of which is a reaction against it).
Generally you only have to read Meditations I and II, and not bother with the parts where he proves the existence of God.
The whole thing is around 30 pages, so it isn't very intimidating either.
Existentialism is a Humanism, Jean Paul Sartre.
Difficulty level: easy Sartre's brief introduction to existentialism is probably the most straightforward of any existential text. It
is the transcript of a speech, so it is meant for a public audience, which makes it an ideal place to start with existentialism.
(In contrast, Being and Nothingness is long and assumes the reader understands some Kant, Descartes, Heidegger, Hegel,
and Husserl.) Sartre, Beauvoir, Dostoyevsky or Camus's novels can also be read as substitutes.
An Enquiry Concerning Human Understand, David Hume.
Difficulty level: medium Extremely powerful and influential work of skepticism, Hume introduces is Is/Ought gap and Problem
of Induction. Hume was an especially great writer and clear thinker.
The Socratic Dialogs, Plato.
Difficulty level: easy Most of Platos Socratic dialogs can be read by themselves. The Death of Socrates, and Gorgias are
probably as good of a place to start as any.
Meditations, Marcus Aurelius.
Difficulty level: easy Marcus Aurelius's personal journal and meditations on philosophy. This can work as an introduction to
Stoicism. While Aurelius was certainly educated on Plato and Aristotle, the text stands alone, although it can be a bit long
winded and repetitive at times. It is a great book to digest in small chunks, since it is written as a journal (as opposed to a
single argument building over the course of the book).
The Problems of Philosophy, Bertrand Russell.
Difficulty level: easy Russells text already intended to introduce a layperson to the most prominent thinkers, so it's an
excellent place to start.
Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault.
Difficulty level: hard Foucault's major work on the power dynamics in society throughout European history. Foucaults prose
is very difficult to understand, and he uses a lot of specialized language (much of which he invents himself). Some people
even accuse him of being purposely obscure.
Works which assume some prior knowledge:
Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche.
Difficulty level: hard
Who to read first: Kant, secondary sources on Nietzsche
Nietzsche is generally working off the background of Kant and other Enlightenment thinkers, but I think this is probably the
most context-free of Nietzsche's works. Nietzsche is often misinterpreted, especially by beginners, so go through some
summaries of him first to get an idea of what to look for in the text, and get a sense of how experts view him.
The Two Dogmas of Empiricism, Willard Van Orman Quine.
Difficulty level: medium
Who to read first: Kant, Wittgenstein
Quine assumes some familiarity with previous conceptions of epistemology, such as Kant and the logical positivists. Quine
attempts to dispel the idea that there is a clear split between analytic and synthetic knowledge, and that all knowledge is
reducible. If you don't have a good idea what the analytic/synthetic split is, you probably shouldn't read this book yet.
The Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant.
Difficulty level: very hard
Who to read first: Hume
One of the most important and influential works of philosophy, written largely as a response to Hume's skepticism. It's
probably better to begin with summaries rather than taking a year to try to plow through it as an amateur. Most other
philosophers are heavily influenced by Kant, so youll need a basic understanding of his metaphysics, epistemology, and
http://existentialcomics.com/blog
Page 2 of 5
8/6/16 4:41 pm
ethics. You can get that from other sources however, so you can avoid reading Kant directly.
Philosophical Investigations, Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Difficulty level: hard
Who to read first: the positivists, early Wittgenstein
If you are interested in philosophy of language, both this and the Tractatus can be read on their own, but require high effort
and consultations of secondary sources.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn.
Difficulty level: medium
Who to read first: Popper, the positivists
Could be an entry point into philosophy of science, as long as youve already done some brief reading into positivism (though
I don't think anyone actually wants to read Carnap anymore).
Either/Or, Soren Kierkegaard.
Difficulty level: medium
Who to read first: Hegel
Kierkegaard generally works in the background of Hegelian thought, and Either/Or was the easiest work by Kierkegaard for
me to understand. He can be very difficult to interpret, even for the experts, so going through secondary sources beforehand
is immensely helpful.
Being and Time, Martin Heidegger.
Difficulty level: hard
Who to read first: Kant, Hegel
Heidegger was one of those philosophers who thought everyone before him was horribly off-track. In theory, Heidegger can
be read on his own, as he was often starting from scratch, but he was very influenced by Hegel, Kant, and Kierkegaard, and
his works are again, long and difficult. Unless you are very interested in him, just get an overview instead. If you do want to
dive in anyway, you should listen to Hubert Dreyfus lectures first (linked below).
Phenomenology of Spirit, GWF Hegel.
Difficulty level: Hegel
Who to read first: Kant
Just don't. Incredibly long and confusing. I've linked to a nice Hegel lecture below that you can listen to instead. You can
also just read transcripts of his lectures, where he tries to be somewhat comprehensible.
Page 3 of 5
8/6/16 4:41 pm
question. Remember, it is very easy to go astray reading philosophy, but you can always get help from people who are more
knowledgeable.
Free online lectures by University Professors:
There are an incredible number of lectures available for free online. I always try to listen to lectures before tackling a new
thinker to get a general idea of what they are about. Like the philosophical works, treat lecturers like scientists; don't assume
that you are smarter than them (as you probably aren't). It's their job to understand this material, and you are just
encountering it for the first time. Here are some of my favorites:
Full courses (usually around 30 hours of content):
John Searle's Philosophy of Mind course at Berkeley
John Searle is a world famous philosopher, best known for his "Chinese Room" thought experiment. Here, he gives his
ideas about Philosophy of Mind, as well as some of its history and competing ideas by contemporary thinkers (although he
is pretty dismissive of anyone who isn't himself). If you are one of those people whos read briefly about the Chinese Room
and found it to be "a bunch of crap", I recommend you listen to John Searle's full account. Many people seem to have a
terrible misunderstanding of what John Searle actually believes (and why).
John Searle's Philosophy of Language course at Berkeley
John Searle gives his own ideas about language, intentionality, and thought. He also covers a lot of other Philosophers of
Language, such as Whitehead and Wittgenstein.
Hubert Dreyfus's lectures on Heidegger
Dreyfus is one of the most respected commentators on Heidegger in the world, and you can get his full Heidegger lectures
for free. He makes it pretty easy to understand - at least as much as you can for Heidegger. I very much recommend
listening to this before trying to read Heidegger yourself, as it will probably save you from misunderstandings.
Hubert Dreyfus's lectures on Existentialism in Film and Literature (Kierkegaard, Some Nietzsche, Dostoevsky's Brothers
Karamazov)
A series with Dreyfuss unique take on thinkers such as Kierkegaards, Nietzsche, and Dostoyevsky. I particularly recommend
it for his analysis of The Brothers Karamaroz, if you have read that book (it is the greatest novel ever written, so you
probably should read it either way).
David Rathbone's Lectures on Hegel
Talks about much of Hegel's thought, such as historical idealism, the concept of the self, time, and the sublime. Hegel is one
of the more challenging thinkers, so listen to this and read up on SEP before trying to tackle him.
Shorter lectures that cover a single thinker in around an hour:
Rick Roderick, the Self Under Seige Lecture series
Rick Roderick is the greatest. If you are only going to listen to one lecture series, make it this one. He covers Heidegger,
Sartre, Marcuse, Habernas, Foucault, Derrida, and Baudrillard. Each episode is about a half hour long.
Rick Roderick, Philosophy and Human values series
Another series by Roderick which covers Socrates, Epicurus, Stoicism, Greek Skeptics, Kant, John Stuart Mill, Hegel,
Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, and Postmodernism.
Gregory Sadler's YouTube page
Gregory Sadler has a wide variety of short introductory lectures on many of the Existentialists, Greeks, Hegel, and more.
YouTube in general.
YouTube might have the most philosophical content of any single platform in the history of the world. My process often starts
with YouTube, then SEP, then podcasts, then reading primary material.
In closing, don't be an idiot who thinks you already know it all, or you will be destined to remain an idiot who thinks you
already know it all.
Permalink
Date published: 02-12-2015
Support the comic on Patreon
http://existentialcomics.com/blog
Page 4 of 5
Comics I enjoy:
Dead Philosophers in Heaven
SMBC Comics
Dinosaur Comics
Lunar Baboon
Nedroid Picture Diary
http://existentialcomics.com/blog
8/6/16 4:41 pm
Contact: existentialcomics@gmail.com
Page 5 of 5