One way I like to engage with philosophy when direct philosophy is too arduous to engage with or when I'm burnt out, but also derive no satisfaction from Pop philosophy, is to engage with it through stories. Infact that is first how I became interested in philosophical questions in my late teen years.When I asked this online, I got stuff like Crime and Punishment, and Infinite Jest. But having actually read some philosophy books myself now, they dont seem to engage with philosophical questions "hard enough". I can't say enough about IJ, as I havent finished it yet, but when I'm reading 10 pages about some dude being anxious about whether the weed dealer will come or not, and telling us how much they prepared for this. I sorta "get the point". Its almost like the point is so straight, that theres ultimately no point in the end if that makes sense.Whereas in Crime and Punishment its like every plot beat is contrived to directly lead to the conclusion of "finding Christ". Like the abandonment of Raskolnikovs prior values, of which hes admittedly little more than a stereotypical representation of, wasnt earned, they werent engaged with, his actions werent a reasonable product of them, and so what is left, isnt a counter argument, or a counter proof in the form of a naturally accuring story, but instead pure consequence, leaving the protagonist with nothing, where anything can be filled in with afterwards, in the case of this book. It was Christianity.Any ideology, any thought, any principle can be defeated if you just shoot the person advocating for it. Or if its implemented poorly, hastily, with poor understanding.Thats shallow. Personally I don't understand how people enjoy stories that play out in such a way. I want to be convinced, to engage with the implications shown as if they're not arbitrary, in the way "By Definition" is arbitrary. So that I can be assured in a conclusion that does not come from itself.Is that Dune?
It has a lot of buddhist and islamic philosophies
>>25023790what does it actually do or say with these philosophies that's interesting?
>>25023785Read R. Scott Bakker's Second Apocalypse series', Prince of Nothing and Aspect-Emperor.Those are philosophical.
Not really, the most interesting thing about Dune is the Butlerian Jihad as a representation of anxiety about technology but that’s not dwelt upon in any great detail. Dune is like an elevated space opera, I think it’s good, but it’s not especially deep
>>25023785I read it like 15 years ago, but no. Dune is more about economics, politics and history than philosophy.
>>25023797not much, it just sorta namedrops them the way a "philosophical" anime or video game would. if you want actual philosophical fiction, you're not gonna find much in sci-fi/fantasy. black metal lyrics have more philosophy unironically.
>>25023990>I think it’s good, but it’s not especially deepin general? or just philosophically? because im worried im being too strict when i say "philosophical"if anybody actually hopefully read everything i typed up in OP. Its less about havinv "philosophical rigor" and more about not committing the follies i personally found in the two books i reference and use as examples as often considered deep or philosophical, but didnt feel like so to me.there have been loads of anime/manga and even tv shows ive watched and read in the past, that arent philosophically rigorous, but yet still tackle concepts in what id call a "philosophical way".Its really hard to describe this without the experience of having read philosophy, and even with the experience. Especially because not all philosophers philosophize in the same way. But my favourite TYPE of philosophy, even if its not a philosopher I actually agree with all that much now. Is Plato. I think the sense of a "back and forth dialogue" is the strongest way to approach philosophy. And the way Plato does it, is specifically in a way that CANNOT be contrived. He asks and makes sure his interlocutor accepts certain basic ideas before moving on, and if they dont accept, they argue about that basis with analogies or whatnot. Plato will sometimes write characters to think of Socrates as a "trickster with words" to me, the reason why he does this, is because hes aware that to retards, the way Socrates wins arguments is too easy and convincing, so he directly in a sort of meta, but not meta way, tries to address that. Probably because if we take how Socrates died irl to be true, then people considered his intelligence to be "trickster" and I respect that he tries to address that, because that concern of "trickery" is essentially the same as my concern for contrivance in stories, where essentially everything about the story exists to affirm the presupposed point, irregardless of how reasonable (usually because its reasonableness is never established, its not that convenient things cant occur, its when theyre not sufficiently explained in a non circular way) or realistic it isFor me, and what im looking for, the story and its progesssion itself should act as the analogy, and the characters should be the interlocutors, arguings about the events that happen, and they should have sufficient depth that we can understand completely and immediately why they view and understand things the way they do. Not just that they understand things the way they do, like Raskolnikov if that makes sense.I think a lot of people give Raskolnikovs characterization a pass either because they can imagine a person like that, or think of his ideology in that way. Its like a confirmation bias sort of thing to me. But his character isnt remotely reasonable ro me, and I dont mean that as "he doesnt make the right decisions!" i mean the way he thinks and acts does not make sense. Its something only a story could produce.
lol nobody cares dude
>>25023965Are these really the only ones? Opening prologue seems edgy more than philosophical
Malazan? Idk havent read it myself but heard its deep
>>25023785The main "philosophical" idea of Dune is that combining religion with politics is dangerous. However, Dune is primarily a work of mid-century scifi, which means that it's more about the speculative idea than the philosophical one. Basically, the main question of Dune is "What would it actually be like to know the future?"If you're looking for something like a Dosto book where absolutely everything points to a central theme, that's not Dune. It is thematic, and it does have more focus on ideas than the average modern SFF slop book, but at the end of the day it's still genre fiction. Its primary purpose is to alternate between moody classical tragedy and exciting desert adventures. Still, if you read the first four Dune books you will get a look at some interesting ideas.
I got bored with this book half wayit was dry
>>25025482>If you're looking for something like a Dosto book where absolutely everything points to a central themeDid you not read OP?
This guy definitely was part of the CIA's acid tests wasn't he? I'm not even going to bother looking it up, its part of my headcanon now.
>>25023785What Dune does relatively will is mix Herberts hallucinations while on shrooms, sabres of paradise by lesley branch, living in the Oregon sand dunes and musing about the nature of power a competition in the upper strata of society.
>>25026216I don't think so, but he did do a lot of mushrooms.
>>25026262hmmm why would i be interested in herberts hallucinations and musings if not particularly enlightening or deep? not that im saying theyre not, but saying "what it does well, is translating the others thoughts and feelings"....is like saying "what X book does well, is having written words" atleast thats how im reading it.
