The Music Salon Guide to Reading Philosophy

Philosophy is one of the items listed on the Music Salon masthead and, though we often approach it via aesthetics, a shared concern, as in this post: Aesthetic Facts and Opinions, we also talk about philosophy tout simple. I was going to put up some links, but really there are so many philosophy posts that I could spend half the morning picking and choosing and I really need to get to practicing Bach!

So what I would like to do instead is offer brief comments on different philosophers and what you might gain from reading their works. And at the end I will link to a couple of philosophers on YouTube that might be worth your time. But first, why bother with philosophy? The popular opinion is that it is largely a waste of time--your time would be better spent with self-help books or in the gym. True, a lot of philosophy is of only marginal value to everyday life, but as soon as you stumble across that word "value" you might find yourself asking, what is of value in life? And that is a philosophical question. Sure, you could just go with Conan:

But the ability to examine ideas critically might prove quite useful. For example, in that post I link to above I quote an article in the New York Times by a philosophy professor who points out a problem with the public school curriculum:

The inconsistency in this curriculum is obvious. For example, at the outset of the school year, my son brought home a list of student rights and responsibilities. Had he already read the lesson on fact vs. opinion, he might have noted that the supposed rights of other students were based on no more than opinions. According to the school’s curriculum, it certainly wasn’t true that his classmates deserved to be treated a particular way — that would make it a fact. Similarly, it wasn’t really true that he had any responsibilities — that would be to make a value claim a truth.

Yes, it is perfectly obvious that for a lot of people their moral principles are facts but yours are just opinions! Once you realize this, it becomes easier to stand up for yourself. So let's dive in and take a critical look at famous philosophers:

• Socrates is one of the most important inventors of the philosophical method often called the "Socratic method" which involves asking questions. This makes people uncomfortable so the people of Athens condemned him to death for corrupting the young.
• Plato, his student, continued the work writing a bunch of dialogues of Socrates in conversation. I recommend the first one, the Euthyphro which poses the interesting dilemma, do the gods condemn murder because it is wrong or is it wrong because they condemn it?
• Aristotle, student of Plato, was the teacher of Alexander the Great and basically laid the foundation of things like logic, metaphysics, aesthetics, psychology, ethics, botany, and a few other things. Plato is easy to read, but Aristotle is emphatically not--like many really great thinkers he is a very awkward writer. But the book to read is the Nicomachean Ethics a guide to moral conduct for many for centuries.
• There is rather a large gap as the Romans were not big on philosophy, but things improved when Western Europe discovered the ancient Greeks. St. Thomas Aquinas created a synthesis of Aristotle with theology that still remains the foundation of Catholic theology. The most accessible text is the section on the five ways to prove the existence of God from the Summa Theologica.
• The founder of modern philosophy is the 17th century French philosopher René Descartes. His Meditations on First Philosophy is worth reading and it's only sixty pages.
• The best philosopher writing in English is the Scot David Hume and his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion will give you a taste. It's a bit longer, but still only 120 pages.

I think I will stop there as philosophy gets more and more gnarly (not to mention lengthy) from here on so I will save that for future posts. But this should give you an intriguing start.

Those YouTube philosophers? One of the best is Jeffrey Kaplan; here is his take on Aristotle: