Podcast Vs Philosophy
I've always enjoyed thinking about philosophy. I found myself recently glibly quoting Hume and then the very next day was thinking about the relationships to corporations and power ala Foucault and his friendly Panopticon.
No matter how much I think about philosophy, I actually hate reading it. It seems like a good situation where 20 minutes spent reading an encyclopedia or the web will be much more useful than the hours spent slogging through something like 'Phenomenology of Spirit' or 'Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics'.
Much more fun (and 21st century) to just listen to a podcast about philosophy and get someone else's ideas of what it's all about. I found myself doing this about Kirkegaard earlier this week: I have zero interest in reading his books, but couldn't stop listening to the 30-odd minutes of discussion about it.
And that's probably for the best: doing dishes, contemplating paradox, words from a different century quickly filling my ears while I think about how to clean ketchup off a plate.
No matter how much I think about philosophy, I actually hate reading it. It seems like a good situation where 20 minutes spent reading an encyclopedia or the web will be much more useful than the hours spent slogging through something like 'Phenomenology of Spirit' or 'Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics'.
Much more fun (and 21st century) to just listen to a podcast about philosophy and get someone else's ideas of what it's all about. I found myself doing this about Kirkegaard earlier this week: I have zero interest in reading his books, but couldn't stop listening to the 30-odd minutes of discussion about it.
And that's probably for the best: doing dishes, contemplating paradox, words from a different century quickly filling my ears while I think about how to clean ketchup off a plate.
posted by planetshwoop at
10:53 PM
4 Comments:
Reading philosophy is like long distance running - not everyone has the lung strength, and endurance to make work for them. I've listen to tapes, video's and the like where someone gives their interpretation of this thinker or that, but it truly not the same as engaging the thinker in your own imagination.
I have adopted in spirit much of Foucault suggest in power/knowledge social constraint analysis, but I have had to know his work intimately in order to overlay it into my work. I would never know which iteration of his work made the strongest contributions to my aims if I had simply let someone else do the reading.
Maybe you do not need to fold philosophy into your life in this way - then podcast or cliff notes or whatever works.
If you'd like to see how I use Foucault - stop by http://reputationist.com
Hmm. But perhaps you did need the interpretation to make sure that you picked Foucault in the first place vs Hegel or Socrates?
I recognize that it is not the same as reading and thus engaging the thinker directly. I guess I just feel that a) it's hard to read philosophy and actually 'get it' when I have many many other demands on my time and b) I prefer to have a less deep exposure to many writers than a single exposure to the few I can reliably read.
This post has been removed by the author.
Reading Philosophy is not that big a deal. But what nurtures your "mind"? Whatever method you use to separate the humdrum stuff of daily running around from mindfulness - do that, if on the other hand you are consumed by the daily stuff - I have suggestion - there are lots of ways to break away for mindfulness - pick one - many but be a student of that practice - my practice happens to be reading and writing philosophy.
Post a Comment
<< Home