[sound of pages turning] Oh, sorry. Hope that didn't disturb you just then. It was the sound of books. Pages being turned. So that's just what I was doing. I was just reading...ah...books. So I'm not a moron. Anyway, just finished the last one. The hardest one. Hegel. Do not know what all the fuss was about. Understood it perfectly. Have you read that one?
>>25598677anyway so I'm not fully off-topic, as someone who has only got back to full proper books a year ago or so, and has been reading mostly fiction, is reading philosophy directly worth it? Any good place to start?
>>25598677It's pronounced "Ee-Gull"
>>25598683I'd say personally start with an anthology of sorts and get a feel for the overall "map" of philosophy before diving into primary texts (reading primers is very helpful in learning and you arguably don't need to read every primary source ever as a beginner until you want to start specializing in your interests). If you're too impatient for that then start with the greeks
>>25598687>>25598683And even an anthology is going to still be primarily primary texts, so you could honestly take a step further and start off with some good secondary lit like Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy.Hegel is a good example of WHY you wouldn't want to start with primary texts. His writing is so comically dense and self-structured you gain an incredible amount of scaffolding by starting with secondary literature because it lets you get a foundation much easier without bashing your head a paragraph at a time. But if you wanted to become an actual Hegel specialist you would have to eventually read the primary text anyways, I'm just saying not to start with primaries. Most colleges do the same thing (except st johns) where the beginner courses are broad and sparse in primaries before specializing in due order
>>25598677was he REALLY a moron though? he read Machiavelli. that counts for something right?
>she has a degree in fashion>from france!
>>25598683Yes. Buy a book that has the five major dialogs of Plato. Not only a good theoretical basis but also very readable without a technical phil background and also it will remove an early illusion that many people have: that philosophy is usually interested in saying the way things are instead of just tearing down many examples of the way things aren't.
>>25598683If your interest in it isn’t organic enough to just do it without our say so, I would say no, for you it wouldn’t be worth it.
I think the writings for both portal 1 and 2 are masterclasses relative to the median in video games. for valve, halflife 2 has stronger worldbuilding but probably weaker direct dialogue and "upfront" writing if that makes sense. Portal as a series has more limited worldbuilding but is entirely invested in building a specific relationship between a small cast of characters (chell, glados, wheatley, maybe cave johnson) and hammering it down wellstill not sure if portal 1 has better writing than portal 2. I think it's definitely much more experimental and interesting, though
>>25598677>>25598683Average /lit/ posters
