An investigation into our own cognition as rational beings can be such a productive exercise if done properly. What better way is there to understand than to attempt to grasp our own understanding?
John Locke seems to be more commonly remembered for his political philosophy. Which I consider a shame because I’ve yet to come across a more comprehensive breakdown of knowledge and how we gather it than his Essay.
You’ve probably seen at least a hundred variations of the book-recommendation list articles. Usually, as they pertain to philosophy, these are recommendations of primary sources, like the work of a famous philosopher. Typically they are also marketed towards people looking to pick up their first or second book on the subject.
This is not one of those articles.
The targeted-demographic for this list will be someone who already has a solid-footing in philosophy. The books on this list will serve as references that will help deepen your understanding of the topics and terms you are already a little familiar with.
The modern period of philosophy, depending on who you ask, begins around the late 16th century and extends to the late 18th century or even later.
Some will say that it began earlier or that it extended much further. That’s irrelevant, though, as the purpose of this article is to familiarize you with the most substantive material which took place in the timeframe I mentioned.
In addition, we’ll explore the big names responsible…
Truth is a complicated concept, especially if you’re speaking about it in a philosophical context. In colloquial situations, we tend to take its meaning for granted.
As with any other concept, there’s been plenty of discussion in the philosophical literature about what truth is and what makes something true.
Of course, that’s an important subject to talk about and maybe I will in a future article, but it’s unnecessary for our purposes here. For the sake of the discussion at hand, we can refer to truth in the informal ordinary fashion and presuppose whatever that entails.
I’d like to emphasize…
As far as entertainment goes, music seems to be unanimously enjoyed among humans.
Music just seems to be something that is ingrained in us as people. Our music preferences may differ from person to person or from culture to culture, but its presence in some form is the common thread.
I would be surprised to hear of a person who legitimately is unamused by music in any way. Music’s power to move us and alter our thoughts appears to be a universal experience.
If we admit that music has this effect on us, then we must also necessarily concede that…
I was probably 15 or 16 years old when I started to develop an interest in reading serious nonfiction books and primary sources. In my case, it was philosophy, but I suppose it could be applied to any field of a similar nature.
These all are relatively short, easy to understand, and touch on meaningful topics. I had chosen them with that in mind.
I’ve become painfully aware of what can either be called an unfortunate misunderstanding or a deliberate misinterpretation. That being, Aristotle was somehow “anti-democracy.”
There is some basis for this thought, and I don’t blame people who get that impression. Well, I am of the opinion that some people are peddling this idea intentionally for their own ends, but we’ll get to that later.
Almost all lies have some basis in truth, no matter how egregious the jump in logic may be. I’m very confident in my assertion that the belief in question is a fallacious one.
His Politics is where…
If you’ve spent even a middling amount of time in intellectual circles, you will have heard the term “postmodernism” thrown out at some point. The name of postmodernism is usually invoked in an ambiguous way where the speaker takes no time to elaborate on what specifically they are referring to.
Sometimes it can feel as if the term “postmodern” just serves as a way for academics to say “weird” in a highbrow setting. In more egregious cases, it seems postmodernism acts as a dog whistle for anything that is contrary to traditional norms.
People like Jordan Peterson come to mind…
Stoicism has become a bit of a philosophical fad as of late, or at least it seems that way to me. Even people who have no interest in philosophy are probably familiar with some tenets of stoic ideas. That isn’t surprising when you consider that, by its nature, stoicism is an explicitly pragmatic philosophy that appeals to ordinary people.
Epictetus embodies that utilitarian spirit of stoicism better than any other thinker under the category. He was a candidly common and humble man. He wasn’t some obscure intellectual who came up with esoteric theories about who knows what. …
If you engage frequently with the writings of Aristotle, you’re bound to have somebody tell you something along the lines of, “Aristotle was wrong about literally everything.” What surprises me every time I hear claims like these is the seemingly blatant disregard for the conditions Aristotle lived under. I mean, we’re talking about someone who was born in 384 B.C.
I’m going to attempt to familiarize you with the accusations levied against him and attempt to make a case for why we should be more forgiving when we point out his faults.
Professional layman and mediocre sophist with an interest in many things.