/phil/ - Books

>>56227
Why did you read Humes work in reverse order?

What were your thoughts on The metaphysics?

>>56959
What actually happened was i read the first book out of the treatise then went and read the enquiry. now i'm working forward on the treatise again.

The metaphysics is just great. Aristotle starts by looking at the philosophies of his time, discarding all of them and moving forward on his own. The entire system of the metaphysics is amazing for the time of Aristotle and is well worth the read in my opinion. More than that it is also nice to have a solid conception of since it practically becomes dogma for 1800 years after Aristotle's death. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the subject matter, Aristotle himself is just an amazing thinker.

>>57170
Interesting, the metaphysics is meant to be one of the more confusing and dry of his works, how did you find it style wise?

>>57208
Tedious to say the least, Aristotle will make a point then move forward on it without referencing back to it later. So basically you have to keep track of every line of his proofs to get an accurate picture of what he's saying. Other than that he's very thorough in his investigations of subjects, specifically substance,
I found it stimulating when i was reading through it, but i could see how someone might find it irritating or dry.

>>57359
thats good to hear, have your readings had any impact on your religious view points thusfar?

>>57580
not really, I've been an atheist pretty much since i was in middle school, if anything all that's happened is I've softened my opinions a bit. I don't generally care about religion so it's not a subject I read much, if anything, on. My interests are really in political theory, epistemology, and logic.

>>56227
>I hear a lot about how /his/ won't ever be the same philosophical powerhouse that /lit/ is

The most important thing we need is at least 3 Nietzsche threads a day, ideally 5 or 7. Somebody get one started.

>>57701
I asked that because Aristotle is the stepping stone to the scholastics who seem to have demonstrated logical proofs for God that cannot easily be discounted.

As for my own reading in answer to your OP, my readings are mainly on political philosophy (Godwins Enquiry Concerning Political Justice, Woodcocks anthologies and some stuff by Rocker) although Ive made some scratchings at metaphysics.

>>57805
probably good read, i'm very new to philosophy in general so i'm slowly working my way through what has been suggested to me as the instrumental thinkers in history.
and yeah the scholastics never really caught my eye with the exception of Aquinas, who i'll circle back to one day.

>>57739
yeah basically, we could also use a few kant threads which are divided by people who have and haven't read kant

>>57963
Here is a thread (soon to be deleted Id wager) that gives an example of scholastic logic

boards.4chan.org/lit/thread/7302399