Philosophy Book

Better than Russell's history and the pages are colorful and glossy. You could do worse.

Why not just read primary sources man? The whole point of reading is that it's difficult enough so that you grow somehow by struggling to understand; it's not worth it otherwise.

>>9675074
there are some great anthologies of primary source philosophy. You'd do better to start with those.

>>9675244
Can you lead me to where i can find them?

>>9675295
http://books.wwnorton.com/books/webad.aspx?id=4294986056

Western Philosophy: An Anthology by John Cottingham

https://www.amazon.com/Great-Philosophers-Introduction-Western-Philosophy/dp/019289322X/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=019289322X&pd_rd_r=5SKT99XRSWV0YR6XN6K8&pd_rd_w=IFNmC&pd_rd_wg=NXISR&psc=1&refRID=5SKT99XRSWV0YR6XN6K8

Political because I know you're interested in that too:

http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-1405130644.html


https://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Politics-Economics-Jonathan-Anomaly/dp/0190207310/ref=sr_1_14?ie=UTF8&qid=1496535744&sr=8-14&keywords=anthology+political+philosophy

>>9675193
You should read primary sources supplemented with secondary sources. Your comprehension and understanding both of the ideas themselves, and their historical background and consequence will be increased dramatically.

Why do so many pseuds on this board hate on secondary sources?

>>9675313
I think it's implied

>>9675313
Because they were raised in a Protestant household/society.

>>9675313

"Around almost every important author an enormous critical apparatus has come into being. Its prime aim is just to help us to read better. But somehow all this wealth of scholarly aid does not lift up our hearts as it should. It spreads attention out too thinly and daunts us with the thought that we would have to know everything before we could know anything. Doubtless this is true, philosophically, but to readers in search of a method it is unhelpful". – I.A. Richards.

I don't "hate" on secondary sources, but for anyone beginning to read they're completely unhelpful in actually learning how to read. They're only helpful once one knows how.

>>9675074
most of that whole series is pretty good as a primer and as coffee table books. i have a couple of them. i enjoyed the literature one and the shakespeare one.

of course, philosophy is still a fucking waste of time

>>9675768
/lit/ everybody.

>>9675772
It's usually pseuds who lash out at this type of book.

>>9675795
It really isn't. But my comment was referring to "philosophy is still a fucking waste of time".

>>9675313
This

>>9675768
Go back to /b/

marx btfo

File: socra.jpg (76KB, 334x250px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 334x250px

>>9675768
Enjoying the unexamined life eh?

Normie-core coffee table book. It has very small chapters for each philosopher they consider important. Buy it if you want to get into philosophy. If you already know your shit youd better off just using google.

t. someone who owns the book

too basic

>>9675308
>>9675313
Thanks