Recommendations for a young mind

Books and Papers
1

Hello all, I am seeking some recommendations on texts to read as an 18-year-old who has only dipped their toes into what is the vast ocean of philosophy.

For most of my young life I have been absorbed by my fascinations with astronomy, technology, and science fiction, but now I am much more interested in learning (and thinking) about the world around me and how I ought to see it.

My father gave me a copy of A History of Western Philosophy by Bertrand Russell, but it has proved to be a hard read for me, as it seems to have been written on the assumption of the reader having a basic understanding of the works of many philosophers.

I have also dabbled in some of Alan Watts’s books and have found them particularly alluring, and I have found both Western and Eastern thought to be interesting.

I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts on a good starting point for philosophy, and any tips in helping someone like me learn would be greatly appreciated.

3 Likes
2

It’s a safe bet that more young people have read Watts than Russell. and there’s nothing wrong with that.

Wander around a bit. If you don’t live near a very good bookstore or a very good library, try Project Gutenberg, where you can find free electronic editions of a great number of classics. (In the philosophy section there, you’ll see one of the most popular downloads is another of Russell’s called The Problems of Philosophy, which might suit you more than the history.) Look at anything you’re curious about. They have old translations of Plato. They have Emerson, who’s a little more like Watts than Russell.

Read a lot of page ones and see what happens.

1 Like
3

Welcome to TPF, @Vulcan :waving_hand:

In my opinion Russell’s History is a good place to start—despite its notorious weaknesses—but as you say it also assumes more background than maybe you’d expect from an introductory overview. Finding it heavy at 18 is completely normal.

A shorter and more modern equivalent might be A Little History of Philosophy by Nigel Warburton.

Since you appreciate science fiction, a philosophical novel like Jostein Gaarder’s Sophie’s World might be good, since it’s aimed at young adults.

When I started studying philosophy I found the shorter dialogues of Plato to be a good introduction to philosophical thinking: Apology, Crito, Euthyphro, Phaedo, or the Symposium.

But in my opinion, the specific path you take is not a crucial decision—so long as it genuinely interests you. Don’t pay attention to people who say you have to read X, Y, and Z before you can begin to know anything about philosophy. That’s not true. The best way in is to follow the particular questions and problems that move you. For instance, Plato might not work for you at all, and that’s fine—you can come back to it down the line.

2 Likes
4

I followed the advice to read that early on in my studies, and I really disliked it. It’s mis-titled and I imagine has put many people off taking philosophy any further. What it really is is a very narrow introduction to early-20th-century British analytic epistemology.

I say this not to condemn the book or the people who suggest it, but just to emphasize that it’s totally okay for a beginner to find it utterly unexciting and useless (I guess it does sound like I’m condemning it :laughing:).

So, @Vulcan, feel free to try it but don’t be too dismayed if it doesn’t work for you. At least it’s short.

2 Likes
5

fwiw, I absolutely loved it and feel it covers all of the worthwhile problems we encounter. It may be parochial, but I don’t think much is missing. Other than the Hard Problem not much has been added since in my view.

Many think some of those problems are not problems, and semantic mistakes. Cest la vie

6

I will make one more recommendation: stay away from Nietzsche, at least for a while. It’s very difficult to read Nietzsche when you’re young and not get the impression that most other philosophers were full of shit. That might be true, but you don’t want to take his word for it before you’ve read any of them.

1 Like
7

Fair enough. But it doesn’t really fulfil the promise of its title when it doesn’t even begin to address these:

  • Ethics and political philosophy
  • Philosophy of mind (except for perception)
  • Language
  • Phenomenology and questions about lived experience, freedom, embodiment, etc.
  • History and interpretation, as emphasized by my favourite philosophers, e.g., Hegel, MacIntyre, and Adorno

And in my view, since it’s in the tradition of the sense-data view of perception, the book is historically interesting but largely superseded even just regarding the questions it does address. That so many beginners and amateurs (I’m an amateur myself so that’s not meant disparagingly) read it when they start might explain why so many of them get trapped in the sense-data/indirect realism approach, and fail to see that most contemporary philosophers no longer accept it.

NOTE FOR OTHERS: we’re talking about Russell’s Problems of Philosophy, not his History.

8

Hard to know which level you’re on in your knowledge of philosophy, but I would start with more general philosophy books that goes through the history of philosophy.

It’s important to know how the train of thought has been throughout history in order to grasp how more recent philosophy adds to, or rejects to the conversation.

Just having a good learned awareness of all of that takes time in itself, but it is the best foundation as it structures the mind to “think like a philosopher”. That way, philosophical texts will make better sense to you and all that hard reads will become easier as you start to pick up on the language and the tropes of philosophical writing.

I would recommend you start reading those. .

1 Like
9

If you liked Watts, I recommend “The Tao Te Ching” by Lao Tzu. I have a strong interest in metaphysics and epistemology and it is at the heart of what I value in philosophy. Although I also find things of value in western philosophy, I think much of it tries to make profundity out of disagreements and misunderstandings about language. The best thing about “The Tao Te Ching” ? It’s short. You can read it in a couple of hours and then argue about it for the rest of your life. Here’s a link to dozens of different translations.

https://terebess.hu/english/tao/_index.html

I started with Stephen Mitchell’s version. Many say it is “inauthentic.” What that means to me is that it works well for beginners here in the west. I also like Lin Yutang and Gia-Fu Feng. Taoism is not a major subject for discussion here on the forum.

I’m not the right person to make recommendations on western philosophy.

1 Like
10

‘Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance’ by Robert Pirsig. I first read this when I was around your age. lt’s a beautifully written introduction to philosophy and more.

1 Like
11

So many books, so little time – even if you are young and have 70 years or more ahead of you.

I too am interested in understanding the world around me, but I haven’t found philosophy all that interesting (an odd statement on a philosophy forum, I suppose). Fortunately, there are many ways to investigate the world. “Astronomy, technology, and science fiction” are 3 of many. There is also sociology and political science, chemistry, physics, psychology, history, the various arts, geology, and so on. Understanding the world is a life-long pursuit.

What matters more than where you begin is that you continue to pursue understanding. Read widely. Study. Discuss with others. Contribute to society however you can. Be kind and generous. Whatever happens along the way, try to enjoy life as much as possible.

Philosophy has been going on for 2500 years. You can attack it head on, or you can start by reading about philosophy. Second hand is sometimes better. Summaries can be very helpful. Even AI can assist.

Good luck, and welcome!

2 Likes
12

For something quite simple but with broad range, perhaps Simon Blackburn’s Think.

I think (pun intended) it was my introduction to philosophy.

Then perhaps Decartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy. It’s a very important (at least the first two parts) but relatively short work.

1 Like
13

My favourite introduction to the philosophy of mind that is accessible to beginners — and just delightful to read — is Kinds of Minds by Daniel C. Dennett. There is an old audio cassette version read by the author that I think you can find on YouTube or the Internet Archive. The audio quality is… antique, but I love to hear the author read his own words.

Kinds of Minds is an opinionated book about philosophy of mind — it represents the author’s own views — rather than a neutral survey or textbook. However, you can always read works by other authors who disagree if you want a more representative perspective on the field of philosophy of mind later on.

14

The pig that wants to be eaten by Julian Baggini. Fun and easy read, a book I could recommend even to people who otherwise aren’t particularly interested in philosophy.

1 Like
15

I understand and that’s fair.

For me the idea that somehow the sense-data theory has been actually debunked is nonsense, so I accept your position but present this one as a reason to reject yours and continue with the book anyway (for a third party reader) because it, in fact, does address those problems in ways that are still apt, despite something like Austin’s (imo) relatively unhelpful work on it in.

Disclaimer: Every word above is for another posted to read, not aimed at you as an insult or whatever.

16

I’ll concede that it hasn’t been debunked. What I said is that it’s been superseded. This happens to many philosophical approaches: new generations of philosophers move on to concepts and paradigms they find more useful, whereupon the direct refutation of earlier theories becomes almost irrelevant.

As far as I can tell, this is what happened to sense-data theory. Today the dominant positions in analytic philosophy are direct realism, representationalism, and disjunctivism.

Of those, representationalism seems the closest, but in contrast with sense-data theory, it views perception not as an awareness of inner objects, but as constituted by representational mental states.

Maybe there are qualia theories too, but again, they’re significantly different from sense-data theory in that they’re about properties of experience instead of objects of perception.

In cognitive science, enactivism and embodied cognition have moved even further away from sense-data, treating perception as an active, embodied relation to the environment.

Outside of the analytic tradition, although sense-data theory as such was never a thing, phenomenology rejected the earlier idea that perception is an awareness of inner objects, preferring an intentional relation to the world.

So, I hope you don’t still think I’m speaking nonsense. :slight_smile:

However…

Sense-data theory is historically important, so I’ll back-pedal my condemnation and say that reading Russell’s Problems of Philosophy is actually a really good way of getting an idea of what was going on in early analytic philosophy.

17

I read those too when I was your age, about four decades ago. I think I’d prefer to start with good novels and gradually, perhaps, move on to philosophy. Warburton’s book, mentioned earlier is a pretty good starter.

I still haven’t read much philosophy, as I find most of it dull, recondite and irrelevant to my experience. But I have an interest in what people beleive and why.