
A curated list of philosophy resources - Immune
https://github.com/Jfaler/Philosophize
======
tarcyanm
I am becoming tired of the word "curated" unless it is being used in a context
implying a qualified curator. This could be someone's random list of browser
links for all I know. Who are the curators of this list and how are they
qualified for me to are about their "curated" list? I don't necessarily mean
formal qualifications. Also, curation implies active and personal involvement
(as opposed to passive analysis based on statistical measures of relevance or
citations). Why in this case would I prefer personal curation?

~~~
xaryk
The list includes The Will to Power as the first entry under Nietzsche. On
this basis I'd have to question the degree to which this list was curated at
all as this work wasn't actually written by Nietzsche, but rather edited
together by his sister whose motives may have been suspect.

------
ebg13
This isn't a curated list. This is an empty list. It has almost no content.
None of the links do anything. I can't understand why it's posted here when it
has so little work done and so much work yet to be done.

I hope it grows, of course, but mostly I hope it grows to include people who
aren't a handful of western white men.

~~~
F_J_H
It's a GitHub hosted shared document, open to all. Feel free to add as many
others as you'd like!

I've been enjoying ancient Chinese proverbs lately, such as:

"It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness"

;-)

~~~
ebg13
> _It 's a GitHub hosted shared document, open to all_

So literally the opposite of curated?

~~~
F_J_H
Or shared curation, just like Wikipedia. Depends on your view point I guess.

------
neetfreek
[https://plato.stanford.edu](https://plato.stanford.edu)

A great collection of philosophy resources which was indispensable during my
undergrad philosophy studies.

Search by philosophers, traditions, what have you!

[edit: I see I was beaten to the punch by a minute! Apologies for the double
post]

------
nessunodoro
This list is exclusively of western philosophers.

If you want to step into the world of philosophy at any time period or in any
part of the world, I highly recommend the podcast "A History of Philosophy
Without Any Gaps" by Peter Adamson.

~~~
jadbox
YES! "A History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps" is the best place imho for
anyone to just into learning philosophy.

I'd also recommend "The Great Ideas of Philosophy, 2nd Edition" on audible.
[https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Great-Ideas-of-
Philosophy-2nd...](https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Great-Ideas-of-
Philosophy-2nd-Edition-
Audiobook/B00DDVSD34?pf_rd_p=ae76b2bb-e63d-4a67-b357-dab3dee05ca1&pf_rd_r=93M0SQGN3ZTM0Q9RDJMZ&ref=a_lib_c4_libItem_B00DDVSD34)

------
vga805
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is the one stop shop for most
purposes.

With any one philosopher or topic as a starting point, the additional
resources and bibliographies will be about as good as you can get for a
curated list.

[https://plato.stanford.edu/](https://plato.stanford.edu/)

------
apocalypstyx
Such a list would also benefit from being explicit about translations
(particularly in the case of Kant and Nietzsche) for those who can't read them
in their original. Unfortunately, the public domain versions tend to have
grievous errors that often misconstrue the authors' intentions.

------
harshreality
I think that curated list focuses too heavily on modern philosophy. Does Lacan
even belong? Kierkegaard is Christian philosophy, which I don't think belongs
in a list of general philosophy resources, except as case studies for spotting
logical faults and wishful thinking.

Listing Foucault, but not David Hume, says a lot.

A few surveys would probably be more valuable than trying to slog through most
of the primary sources of philosophy.

\- Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy

\- A.C. Grayling, The History of Philosophy

\- Anthony Kenny, New History of Western Philosophy (4 volumes but also
published as a combined single volume ebook)

\- Adam Peterson, A History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps (3 volumes, 4 later
this year, also a podcast[1])

\- Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy

A common sentiment is that Bertrand Russell is too biased in his presentation,
but his survey was a popular classic for many years.

Perhaps also a supplement specific to eastern philosophy, like van Norden, An
Introduction to Classical Chinese Philosophy?

[1] [https://historyofphilosophy.net/all-
episodes](https://historyofphilosophy.net/all-episodes)

~~~
asark
> A common sentiment is that Bertrand Russell is too biased in his
> presentation, but his survey was a popular classic for many years.

Since he explicitly comments on his subjects and is quite clear when he's
doing so, and lays out up front which sorts of things he'll be focusing on for
the whole enterprise, that complaint's never made much sense to me. I'm sure
there's some further bias, but that's going to necessarily be true of any
shortish treatment of such a broad field.

> \- Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy

I'd for sure recommend Russell over this. Durant's scope both in philosophers
covered, and the portions of their philosophy he focuses on (chiefly ethics,
IIRC), is much smaller, and his coverage less insightful and fluent. Russell's
is the better single-volume intro to the field of the two, Durant's being so
bland and shallow by comparison to make the choice an easy one. Russell's not
really any harder to read, either, though the medieval section's kind of a
slog (Durant solves that problem by basically skipping all of it).

------
dredmorbius
A curated list of philosophy references:

Will Durant, _The Story of Philosophy_ (1927, 1960)
[https://www.worldcat.org/title/story-of-philosophy-the-
lives...](https://www.worldcat.org/title/story-of-philosophy-the-lives-and-
opinions-of-the-greater-philosophers/oclc/840483360&referer=brief_results)
(Wikipedia:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Philosophy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Philosophy))
Western only.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
[https://plato.stanford.edu](https://plato.stanford.edu)

The Basics of Philosophy:
[https://www.philosophybasics.com](https://www.philosophybasics.com)

Nigel Warburton, _A Little History of Philosophy_.
[https://www.worldcat.org/title/little-history-of-
philosophy/...](https://www.worldcat.org/title/little-history-of-
philosophy/oclc/1091635480&referer=brief_results). Light, but a good overview.

Peter Adamson, "The History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps":
[https://historyofphilosophy.net](https://historyofphilosophy.net). Extremely
comprehensive.

Carneades.org on Youtube:
[https://youtube.com/user/carneadesofcyrene](https://youtube.com/user/carneadesofcyrene)
and homepage: [https://carneades.org](https://carneades.org)

Allain de Botton's School of Life series s light but often quite good: Western
Philosophy:
[https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwxNMb28XmpeypJMHfNbJ4R...](https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwxNMb28XmpeypJMHfNbJ4RAFkRtmAN3P).
Eastern Philosophy:
[https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwxNMb28XmpeUL1vz9Su7Om...](https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwxNMb28XmpeUL1vz9Su7OmeghBDgmj7X)

------
voidhorse
As others have already mentioned, this is a fairly shallow list of more or
less just the most popular Philosophers in a decidely western Germanic
tradition (excepting maybe Lacan). I think some diversity as well as inclusion
of lesser known thinkers (whose thought is perhaps more specialized to
particular branches of philosophy) would improve it.

------
schlupfknoten
This is an arbitrary selection of (exclusively western and male) philosophers,
ordered by first names(?), listing the titles of some of their works. No
attempt at any classification; no links to easily access the listed works. I
don't see how this could be of any use to me.

~~~
vehemenz
The western and male part shouldn't bother anyone. I'm kind of surprised to
see that comment several times in these comments. Most philosophy in English,
especially before 1960, is written by western males.

Yet no one points out that these all of these sources are continental (as
opposed to analytic) philosophers. I'd think that a "curated" list that omits
Russell, Carnap, and Quine—the most preeminent philosophers of the 20th
century—would raise a bigger fuss among the HN crowd.

------
finolex1
I find modern philosophy papers to be far more interesting, readable and
concise than some of these texts, which are often pretty circuitous.
Unfortunately, I haven't yet found a good site that curates good papers.

~~~
smahony
You might like this:
[http://www.pgrim.org/philosophersannual/index.html](http://www.pgrim.org/philosophersannual/index.html)

It's an annual collection of some of the best papers of the year. It's not
aimed at the general reader so some of these will be impenetrable if you don't
have a background in the specific area, but there's usually a couple of
readable things in each year's edition for someone with an ~undergrad level
foundation.

------
dmead
philosophy majors use
[https://plato.stanford.edu/](https://plato.stanford.edu/)

not sure the motivations behind this list. a nice blurb about it's contents
would be nice.

------
qntty
Weird list. Unless you have a PhD in philosophy, good luck reading some of
these without some serious help. How about some good commentaries that make
some of these books intelligible for the average person? People get PhDs in
prestigious philosophy departments for making some kind of sense of just one
of these books.

