recommendations

[philstudent1991]

To anyone still on here, here's my quandary: I have a brother that is pretty much anti-philosophy. He does math and is pretty bright, but has no background in philosophy at all. I'd like to get him a book that is short, with an introductory feel, that deals with some philosophical issues. Any recommendations? I was thinking the Meditations, which I think is crap myself, but still a pretty general and short text.

[bar_scene_gambler]

If you're looking to convince him, then you'll need to tailor it to his specific interests. It'll have to be something that speaks to him as a person. Philosophy which doesn't speak to him will naturally feel like a waste of his time. So I'd suggest figuring out the sort of thing that would appeal to his personality. Does he think of himself as a realist, as someone who sees the world for what it is? Then maybe something like Aurelius or Epictetus would speak to him. You get the general idea. Just make sure that whatever you start him out with is accessible. And unless there's something about the Meditations which will interest him personally, I wouldn't go that route.

EDIT: Oh, and when are you moving ATL? I'm moving at the end of May, so I figured if you'd be around we could meet up and do something. 

Edited April 22, 2014 by bar_scene_gambler

[jjb919]

The introductory text to philosophy that I used as an undergrad was "Thinking it Through" by Kwame Anthony Appiah.  Each chapter focuses on a different area of philosophy, and is further broken down by major views and movements within each area and the central thinkers who champion them.  It's a really good introduction, but it is structured like a text-book so if your brother is anti-philosophy to begin with he may not warm up to it. 

 

Another good introduction is Simon Blackburn's "Think".

 

If your brother likes reading literature there are several big names that deal with philosophical issues in their writings, particularly short stories.  Names that come to mind are Borges, Kafka, Sartre.

 

Since he is into math, Janna Levin's book "A Madman Dreams of Turing Machines" is a fictional novel about Goedel and Turing that deals with some philosophical themes.

[ZiggyPhil]

The classic recommendation would be Russell's The Problems of Philosophy.  Since he likes math I'd stick to abstract, metaphysical or logical stuff, and avoid books that focus on value theory (Russell's books fits that description btw).

[lesage13]

A good start might be the Gettier problem. It plays intuitively, has a jarring but hard to deny conclusion, and is very distinctly philosophical. And the original paper is like two pages and change, so your brother really has no excuse not to read it.

[katethekitcat]

Since he is into math, Janna Levin's book "A Madman Dreams of Turing Machines" is a fictional novel about Goedel and Turing that deals with some philosophical themes.

 

Don't do it. Terribly written book.

[jjb919]

Don't do it. Terribly written book.

 

I haven't read it myself. I had just recently heard about it so it came to mind. I should probably do more research before I open my mouth, haha.

[sacklunch]

Why not just give him some ancient plays and/or dialogues, maybe a tragedy? This is how I found philosophy interesting and I suspect I'm not alone. Give him something easy from Plato. Give him Lucian's A True Story (first 'science fiction' work in antiquity).

[Establishment]

Ugh, these suggestions are terrible and are exactly the sort of things that made me think I made a mistake in first majoring in philosophy.

 

Give him Rawls' Two Concepts of a Rule. Give him Russell's On Denoting. Give him Cohen's The Labor Theory of Value and the Concept of Exploitation. These are some beautiful papers not needing any pre-req knowledge. Or, since they do math, just tell them that philosophers have contributed just as much as mathematicians and computer scientists to mathematical logic.

[bar_scene_gambler]

I really don't understand why we're throwing names of philosophers and works around as if they're going to be universally attractive. I know if someone gave me Russell's "On Denoting" (or the other suggestions here) as an example of what philosophers did, I would never have decided to major. I probably would have dropped it and never looked at philosophy again. The reason why I stepped into philosophy to begin with was because the first thing I read, Self-Reliance, was absolutely beautiful and spoke to me and my personal sense of taste. Of course, I've grown since then and reading something outside my area of interest isn't going to make me abandon the field, but you have to get them through the door before you can broaden their horizons. I don't know why we're assuming philstudent's brother is only going to be interested in mathematics. One shouldn't aim at his current interests or what he thinks is useful, one should aim at what he thinks is absolutely indispensable, the thing that speaks to very core of his being. In my case, it was the desire for individuality, but it could be anything. Of course, that makes our task impossible because out of all of us, I'm pretty sure only philstudent knows his brother that well.

Edited April 23, 2014 by bar_scene_gambler

[philstudent1991]

If you're looking to convince him, then you'll need to tailor it to his specific interests. It'll have to be something that speaks to him as a person. Philosophy which doesn't speak to him will naturally feel like a waste of his time. So I'd suggest figuring out the sort of thing that would appeal to his personality. Does he think of himself as a realist, as someone who sees the world for what it is? Then maybe something like Aurelius or Epictetus would speak to him. You get the general idea. Just make sure that whatever you start him out with is accessible. And unless there's something about the Meditations which will interest him personally, I wouldn't go that route.

EDIT: Oh, and when are you moving ATL? I'm moving at the end of May, so I figured if you'd be around we could meet up and do something. 

Good points. I think I'm not gonna move till August. You are your significant other should totally check out the aquarium tho.

[philstudent1991]

Thanks for your suggestions everyone. I knew I could count on you.

[bar_scene_gambler]

Good points. I think I'm not gonna move till August. You are your significant other should totally check out the aquarium tho.

Definitely will. Also, we found this awesome blog where some dude posts awesome stuff to do in ATL on a daily basis. Apparently there's $2 tacos, tequila, and tecate somewhere (can't remember the name) every Tuesday. I'll have to send you the link.

[Establishment]

one should aim at what he thinks is absolutely indispensable, the thing that speaks to very core of his being.

 

This is exactly my point.

 

We're dealing with a mathematician, who all we're told is "anti-philosophy." That could mean a lot of things, but it's a pretty safe bet to say that he probably has some image of philosophy as a bunch of highfalutin ungrounded talk. I know that this was my image of philosophy at first, and I'd scoff at talk about "things that speak to the very core of my being." Giving him Aurelius, Plato, ancient tragedies, philosophical themes in litearture, things that deal superficially with different philosophical themes or issues, fiction that deals with philosophy (I bet there's a 101 class out there that reads Sophie's World.), etc. I can't imagine, going off the limited description of what we have, being good suggestions relevant to what we know about this person.

 

 

I don't know why we're assuming philstudent's brother is only going to be interested in mathematics. One shouldn't aim at his current interests or what he thinks is useful,

 

It seems to me that the easiest way to get a mathematician to have a positive view of philosophy, is to show them that many philosophers are doing the same thing as mathematicians, that persons with PhD's in philosophy can end up being a professor in the mathematics department and vice versa. Then, you show him the real philosophy stuff (that isn't logic). He's already, probably, aware of the famous people like Plato and Derrida. He's not interested in that. He's not interested in superficial or popularized items.

 

I really don't understand why we're throwing names of philosophers and works around as if they're going to be universally attractive.

 

 

I can't speak for others, but I know my suggestions aren't aimed to be universally attractive. But based on the description of the person, who reminds me of myself when I was younger, these were the exact kinds of works that I wish I had been introduced to first.

[bar_scene_gambler]

This is exactly my point.

 

We're dealing with a mathematician, who all we're told is "anti-philosophy." That could mean a lot of things, but it's a pretty safe bet to say that he probably has some image of philosophy as a bunch of highfalutin ungrounded talk. I know that this was my image of philosophy at first, and I'd scoff at talk about "things that speak to the very core of my being." Giving him Aurelius, Plato, ancient tragedies, philosophical themes in litearture, things that deal superficially with different philosophical themes or issues, fiction that deals with philosophy (I bet there's a 101 class out there that reads Sophie's World.), etc. I can't imagine, going off the limited description of what we have, being good suggestions relevant to what we know about this person.

 

 

It seems to me that the easiest way to get a mathematician to have a positive view of philosophy, is to show them that many philosophers are doing the same thing as mathematicians, that persons with PhD's in philosophy can end up being a professor in the mathematics department and vice versa. Then, you show him the real philosophy stuff (that isn't logic). He's already, probably, aware of the famous people like Plato and Derrida. He's not interested in that. He's not interested in superficial or popularized items.

 

 

I can't speak for others, but I know my suggestions aren't aimed to be universally attractive. But based on the description of the person, who reminds me of myself when I was younger, these were the exact kinds of works that I wish I had been introduced to first.

Just to clarify, Aurelius was just an example. It's what I gave to my father because, well, he was the traditional stoic-type who thought that people should just learn to cope with the bad shit in life and push forward. What I mean when I say "the very core of my being" is the things we hold near and dear to us. I hold individuality near and dear, my father holds the ability to cope with the bad in a similar manner, and so on. Maybe philstudent's brother holds mathematics as a field in the same perspective, but it's likely that there's a reason behind his attachment to mathematics and his low opinion of philosophy, one which may be addressed well with Russell or the work of a logician, but that is not necessarily the case. Connecting with the way the individual sees the world and his/her life is how you get them to change their mind about philosophy. Maybe philstudent's brother connects to the world via math, in which case phil math or logic might be a great introduction, but maybe math is only a means to an end or a useful tool to him, in which case philosophy will only seem like another useful tool and not something necessary to life. You know?

As for the universally attractive stuff, I wasn't really referring to your suggestion. I think it was probably one of the better suggestions here.

[objectivityofcontradiction]

Plato

[sacklunch]

I recommend some ancient works (as did the dude above me^), since they are fairly accessible to a 'non-specialist'. I suppose most of the folks on this sub-forum are interested in modern philosophy? Leave the ancients to the classicists, eh!?

 

But really, give him Plato. Your brother will at least know the name, and Plato, at least in the West, has a 'sex' appeal that most moderns do not (everyone 'knows' Nietzsche, but it's too difficult for someone not particularly interested in the subject, I think). Hell, read a Platonic dialogue WITH HIM. It's quite fun. We have done it in some of my (Greek) courses and I was surprised by how much fun/engaging it can be!

[Die_Kurator]

A Mathematician's Apology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Mathematician%27s_Apology).

 

This is a classic text, and most mathematician's revere it. It contains a lot of very interesting insights about math and while Hardy isn't a philosopher he is writing about philosophical issues. If he hasn't read it yet, it's worth reading for the insights into mathematics alone. I studied math at undergrad, and it's one of my favorite books.

 

A little background: Hardy was a huge pacifist and so only worked on topics in math that he thought couldn't ever be used to assist in war. His main focus was group theory, which he happily commented was the most useless branch of all math (ironically, it has HUGE military applications in cryptography. IIRC some of his own results in fact. Sorry Hardy). He wrote it when he was old, but his main purpose in the book is to defend doing math on purely aesthetic grounds. He rejects the idea that math is worthwhile for its practical results (medicine, improvements in quality of living etc.) because it also has a lot of practical defects (improvements of mechanization also mean improvements in war: better killing machines, nukes, etc.). I think he also points out that those sorts of things (good and bad) aren't really produced by mathematicians anyway, and that it takes some time for a theory to gain practical utility, meaning that a mathematician often doesn't have that kind of thing in mind anyway.

 

From there he spends some time trying to argue what makes a mathematical result beautiful. He goes through some interesting and easy to understand examples. It's not very technical philosophically, but there are a lot of important issues that he is talking about in the philosophy of mathematics. If nothing else, I'm sure it's a book he'd appreciate.

[ZiggyPhil]

"I bet there's a 101 class out there that reads Sophie's World."

 

You'd win that bet, as I know someone who teaches it (I have no basis for thinking that a good or bad idea, however)

 

I do think it's best to play to someone preexisting interests, and I think someone who is interested in math is far more likely to enjoy Russell than Plato.  However, if you think "On Denoting" is a good first exposure to philosophy, especially outside of a classroom where it can be thoroughly discussed/explained, I fear you have lost touch with what it's like to be a philosophical newcomer. 

[sacklunch]

Though, to be fair, Plato is very interested in mathematics. What do his (smart) interlocutors do when they want to 'slam dunk' their own argument? Math, always.   

[maxhgns]

How about Frege's Foundations of Arithmetic? The first 80 pages especially, since that's where he gives an overview of existing views on what numbers are and puts his own thoughts forward. It's a very easy read, written by a formidable mathematician, and very important philosophically.

[Kierkegaardashian]

I'd recommend a history of philosophy book, like Will Durrant's The Story of Philosophy. Durrant draws the reader into philosophical thought by starting with the social and historical context and bio of each philosopher. It is very readable, accessible, and entertaining, reading more like a "history of ideas" style book.

[SamStone]

I might recommend Cosmopolis by Stephen Toulmin. I thought it was a really fun book when I read it...pretty entry-level and deals with topics that don't seem too restricted to philosophical topics (helpful for someone who isn't particularly interested in the technical aspects of philosophy). 

[philosopheme]

godel escher bach...right?

[primenumbers]

If he's into math, consider what part of math he's into...  If he's a prob-stat guy, give him some contemporary formal epistemology.  That's what got me into philosophy.  If he's a logic/set theory guy, give him fundamental philosophy of math stuff.