If you can download it, or can afford to pay for a download, I recommend J. Rufus Fears' audio lectures through The Teaching Company: "Famous Romans" and "Famous Greeks." He is a fantastically interesting lecturer and really gives life to the history, and with wit and great humor. He also talks about Herodotus and other historians. I might be persuaded to put a lecture on Youtube if you can't find one yourself to sample.

Shit, my goal was to spend a year on the history of Western philosophy but it is quickly becoming a monumental task just touching the surface of all the ancients!

Also, I just ordered Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War and a compilation of three plays by Aristophanes because I really wanted to read Clouds.

(February 17, 2015 at 9:57 pm)Nestor Wrote: Shit, my goal was to spend a year on the history of Western philosophy but it is quickly becoming a monumental task just touching the surface of all the ancients!

Also, I just ordered Thucydides' The Peloponnesian War and a compilation of three plays by Aristophanes because I really wanted to read Clouds.

Ha, ha, ha! The lack of information regarding the presocratics has lulled you into the idea that studying western philosophy will take no time! If you spend the rest of your life on this one thing, western philosophy, you will never learn it all.

Well yeah, I was hoping to simply get a very broad overview of the major names and themes. But I can see why the Greeks or the Romans themselves are subjects a person can easily devote their lifetime to studying.

(December 30, 2014 at 4:17 pm)Alex K Wrote: It would be fun (to me) if you'd occasionally let us know your thoughts while you tackle some of these works, btw.

I second this.

(December 30, 2014 at 4:38 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: For your historian, I strongly recommend Caesar's 'The Gallic Wars'. It is virtually unique among histories as it was written 'on the fly'. It is almost a news account running to seven volumes.

Boru

And for a little Greek history, Thucydides's account of the Peloponnesian War is good reading.

Philosophy is dead, it really is nothing more than apology. It was a primitive way of brainstorming. But now that we have real science such as neurology and psychiatry and psychology and a scientific understanding of evolutionary biology, the rest really is nothing more than humans making elaborate excuses to claim a social pecking order.

The only "altruism" I can see as valid is knowing our species is literally scientifically unimportant to evolution , the planet and the universe. Accepting that humility is the only way our species can problem solve without the religious or political or economic divisions.

About Bertrand Russell's book: Some people dislike it, as he is very much an interested party in the discussion. In my opinion, it is good that he is open with his views on things, as a pretend "objectivity" is only pretend. It is worth mentioning, though, that not everything he states is uncontroversial, and so one should take care in simply trusting him. Naturally, the same could be said about other such books.

And he is, as you say, an excellent writer. His literary style is superb. Great clarity, and eloquence, combined. It is difficult to not feel envious of his literary skills.

As for what has happened in philosophy since 1945, I think it mostly isn't worth much. I expect that that remark will be misunderstood by some, if they read it, but I don't feel like bothering with an explanation, beyond saying that we have had no one of the caliber of, say, David Hume, since then.

Anyway, I am pretty much on board for your remarks about Russell's book, and about the first four dialogs to read in Plato. I would then go on to the Republic, but that is less important than starting with the first four that you recommend. In your case, though, if you want to read more Plato, you should read the Republic. There you will get to many of the central ideas in Plato's thinking.

(February 19, 2015 at 9:41 pm)Pyrrho Wrote: About Bertrand Russell's book: Some people dislike it, as he is very much an interested party in the discussion. In my opinion, it is good that he is open with his views on things, as a pretend "objectivity" is only pretend. It is worth mentioning, though, that not everything he states is uncontroversial, and so one should take care in simply trusting him. Naturally, the same could be said about other such books.

And he is, as you say, an excellent writer. His literary style is superb. Great clarity, and eloquence, combined. It is difficult to not feel envious of his literary skills.

As for what has happened in philosophy since 1945, I think it mostly isn't worth much. I expect that that remark will be misunderstood by some, if they read it, but I don't feel like bothering with an explanation, beyond saying that we have had no one of the caliber of, say, David Hume, since then.

Anyway, I am pretty much on board for your remarks about Russell's book, and about the first four dialogs to read in Plato. I would then go on to the Republic, but that is less important than starting with the first four that you recommend. In your case, though, if you want to read more Plato, you should read the Republic. There you will get to many of the central ideas in Plato's thinking.

Yeah, the next batch of Plato's works that I'm getting into include the Republic. I am definitely looking forward to that.