Comments Page
Please leave any general comments here, or if your comment relates to a particular podcast, please post it on the relevant podcast page. You can also leave comments on Peter's blog.
For any technical issues concerning the website please use this form or email history.philosophy.gaps.podcast@gmail.com.
In reply to Alan Saunders - The Philosopher's Zone by Jo
Alan Saunders
Thanks for the link. As I mentioned on Twitter and Facebook I was a big fan of the Philosopher's Zone, and enjoyed being on it a couple of times. It's terrible news.
Keep up the good work
Hi Peter
I wanted to let you know that what you are doing is great because for a non philosophy student like myself, but who has spent my University time on other disciplines, your podcasts are covering what would take me years in my spare time to read in books.
Keep up the good work and I'm looking forward to the Renaissance period and beyond....but I appreciate that could be a while yet:-)
Thanks for all your hard work that must go into the Podcast series.
Intro to Philosophy
I've finished through podcast #84, as many as there are so far. It's really quite good. What books can I get that might serve as a mini-library devoted to what you cover here?
In reply to Intro to Philosophy by Marty
Mini-library
Hi there,
Glad you are enjoying the series. Have you had a look at the bibliography recommended on the top pages of each section? (That is, click on e.g. "Aristotle" at the top of the drop-down menu here on the website.) That should give you plenty to choose from, but regarding what we've looked at so far if you want primary texts the things to get are:
Presocratics: Kirk, Raven and Schofield
Plato: The Complete Dialogues from Hackett
Aristotle: the two volume Complete Works edited by Barnes
Hellenistic: Long and Sedley
Neoplatonism: Gerson and Dillon reader from Hackett
Hope that helps,
Peter
In reply to Mini-library by Peter Adamson
Thanks
I went from podcast to podcast and didn't see that there was a top page for each section. Everything is there.
Math?
Hi Peter, once again, thanks for all your hard work on this podcast. I recently recommended it to a friend of mine with a casual interesting in philosophy and (I think) he's enjoying it.
I just noticed that in the comments section of the Pythagoras episode you mentioned doing an interview with a Serafina Cuomo on the subject of ancient mathematics. Might this ever come to pass, especially with Platonism coming back into the fore?
In reply to Math? by JKE
Serafina Cuomo
Hi, thanks for recommending the podcast! Yes, the interview with her has already been recorded and will be released in a few weeks as episode 86, I think it is.
Peter
In reply to Serafina Cuomo by Peter Adamson
Real philosophy
I can't wait until you cover Schleiermacher and Schulze. Thank you so much for this podcast!
Atemporal thanks
My comments today focus on the soothing belief (or relief, if you will) that for years and years the RSS feed will present me with your Sunday episode! Thank you again for the routine you developed, as well as for the dedication, and the enthusiasm you show in every podcast.
Not writing on a regular basis doesn't mean I'm not 'there' - as is all the rest, of course!
Your Theaetetus is doing well; every new discoverer of my blog systematically visits both entries, and the counts are promising!
All my best wishes,
Eugenia DG
Madrid - Spain
In reply to Atemporal thanks by eugenia_dg
Ataraxia
Epicurus says that happiness lies in wanting for nothing and having an expectation that one will continue to avoid suffering in the future. So if it helps I can confirm I plan to keep going for quite some time! ("Years and years" sounds like a good start, anyway.)
Peter
In reply to Ataraxia by Peter Adamson
Episteme
It does help, Peter, and thank you.
It's just that I could hardly adhere to Epicurianism, and in fact I haven't even tried.
'I wanna know
I wanna know
I-wan-na know'(Amos Lee music in the background).
I want to know what makes humans human, and how much of that is left for them to be humane (I'm not joking).
But then again I want to know what happened to the philosophical thought when it got entangled in religious speculations.
And you have quite a few things to say to help (me, and others) disentangle the conundrum!
Eugenia
Important names not to forget
*Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi
*Gotthold Ephraim Lessing
*Johann Gottfried Herder
*Gottlob Ernst Schulze (very important critic of Kant)
*Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Antoine Arnauld
Christian Wolff
Heinrich Heine
Friedrich Hölderlin
Friedrich Schiller
Johann Gottlieb Fichte
Novalis
Gersonides
Peter Kropotkin
Max Stirner
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
Friedrich Schelling
Jakob Böhme
Karl Leonhard Reinhold
Moses Mendelssohn
Salomon Maimon
Friedrich Schleiermacher
Johann Georg Hamann
Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Schlegel
Some lesser known names you might consider:
Ernst Platner
Johann Augustus Eberhard
Christian Garve
Johann Georg Heinrich Feder
In reply to Important names not to forget by Hermit
Also: Hashdai Crescas When
Also:
Hashdai Crescas
When you cover Leibniz, don't forget the great importance of the NEW ESSAYS.
When you cover Spinoza, don't forget his earlier texts, the SHORT TREATISE, the TREATISE ON THE EMENDATION OF THE INTELLECT, and his very important LETTERS. Spinoza's views on duration, time, and eternity (vs. infinity) are very important. Also, his views on the whole being more than the sum of its parts.
In reply to Important names not to forget by Hermit
Thanks
Hermit,
Thanks for all these names!! I’m going to start supplementing my HOPWAG podcasts with a little Wikipedia research from the names you've mentioned. I particularly like the idea of there being a difference between eternity & infinity. I really enjoyed hearing William Lane Craig & Arif Ahmed discuss the difference between an infinite in (set) theory and a bounded infinity occurring in reality... this seems like it might be going down a similar route. I enjoy pulling at definitions for example "soul" & "mind" and seeing where the differences lie - I mean why have two words if they mean the same thing?
As a teacher myself I’m sure that Peter has a bit of an idea about where he wants the series to go and who he wants to include. I teach ICT at secondary school & I often get parents who work in IT giving me long lists of topics that I absolutely MUST include in the children’s education for risk of missing important information. Im just saying that I think the title of the series/podcast leaves itself wide open to a reductio ad absurdum attack - Peter obviously can’t include EVERY philosophical notion ever put to paper.
I'm very grateful for the list - it'll help give me something to google in the morning with my espresso! 8-D
In reply to Thanks by Ben
....wiki-tastic
And I’ve just learned who to credit my terrifying Existential Nihilism to. Thanks!
In reply to Important names not to forget by Hermit
Names
Hi there -- thanks very much for this, very useful! I already have episodes on Crescas and Gersonides planned but as most of these names are from much later, I hadn't even thought about them yet (so in this case I definitely didn't know what you were thinking!). Your list includes numerous people who I would have certainly expected to cover with episodes of their own (e.g. Mendelssohn or Fichte) and, I'm not proud to say, some people I've never even heard of. I'll be learning along with everyone else, it seems.
If anyone else has suggestions about people to cover please do post them here; I will be keeping a list of possible topics. Can't promise to cover everything of course but I'll do my best.
Peter
In reply to Names by Peter Adamson
Ferderick C. Beiser is a good
Ferderick C. Beiser is a good source. Many of these original texts are available on archive.org.
In reply to Names by Peter Adamson
Query
Hello Peter and many thanks.
The podcasts are truly excellent.
Do you think to podcast about S. Augustine and his relation with the neoplatonic tradition?
I am researching now about Epistemology.
My other interest is Maimonides and his relation with Ibn Sina and Al-Farabi about the Intellect.
My best wishes and again thanks,
avi
In reply to Query by avi
Augustine
Hi Avi,
Glad you like the podcasts. Yes, Augustine will get a very thorough treatment, I'm planning 5 episodes on him (currently scheduled as 107-111, I think he'd enjoy our finishing him on that rather Trinitarian number). And of course I will certainly cover al-Farabi, Avicenna and Maimonides!
Peter
Suggestion
Hi Peter,
I like the time line you have put up on the site maybe you could put a summary / dictionary of philosophy terms and meanings as a reference point while listening to your podcast . As always I am enjoying this weeks podcast.
Regards
David
In reply to Suggestion by David
Dictionary
Hi David,
Hm, that's an interesting idea. Do you or anyone else have suggestions about what it should/could cover? Technical terms (with Greek/Latin/etc. originals listed)? Names of historical movements? It sounds like a useful addition but equally somewhat daunting!
Thanks,
Peter
In reply to Dictionary by Peter Adamson
dictionary
Hello Peter:
For me, the most useful dictionary would be of Greek philosophical terms, using the original Greek word.
I already know a bit of Latin, but Latin would be useful too.
You could show how the meaning of a word, say, happiness (in Greek or Latin), varies from one philosopher to another.
It would be easier on you and probably, a good teaching device if with each new lesson, you featured a new word, instead of drawing up one long list.
In reply to dictionary by swallerstein
Dictionary
Ok, thanks for the advice -- I'll see what I can do. I like the idea of a technical term for each episode (when I was a grad student I used to do "word of the day" in my intro to philosophy class!).
I actually am trying to avoid using technical terminology in the podcast scripts insofar as is possible, and to explain them when I do (like if I say "epistemology" I'll usually add, "that is, the study of knowledge"). But if unfamiliar terms are being left unexplained people should let me know.
Peter
In reply to Dictionary by Peter Adamson
Dictionary
Hello Peter,
Although I have been studying Greek for 4 years, and Latin for over 7 years, I support this suggestion of a dictionary. It surely is a good way to avoid getting lost in all the different meanings philosophers give to a single word, but it also allows us to remember more easily of these philosophers - by associating a word or a concept with their names.
Also, I wanted to know if any particular knowledge in philosophy, or any readings, were recommended before starting a philosophy course (undergrade)? Be that as it may, I would be delighted to read philosophy at KCL next year.
And of course, congratulations for this wonderful podcast!
Baptiste
In reply to Dictionary by Baptiste
Readings before embarking on an undergrad degree
Hi Baptiste,
Actually the KCL Philosophy Dept has suggestions about preparatory reading here. Just to warn you and anyone else who is thinking of coming to King's I am going to be moving to Munich, the LMU, to take up a professorship there, as of this summer. I'll still be connected to the KCL Dept but won't be teaching undergrads anymore. The podcast will continue though! And KCL is with or without me an incredible Department (one of the best in the world for history of philosophy, among other things), so I would have no hesitation in encouraging anyone to apply to any of the degrees.
Peter
In reply to Readings before embarking on an undergrad degree by Peter Adamson
Good luck
Hi Peter,
Thank you for your prompt answer and for having shared the link.
I have to admit I am disappointed of your leaving. Indeed, I really enjoy your podcast and, having had a look at some of your lecture notes, I think I would have been really pleased to attend these lectures.
However, I wish you all the best in Munich, and good luck with the podcast!
Sincerely,
Baptiste
In reply to Readings before embarking on an undergrad degree by Peter Adamson
Move to Munich
Hi Peter,
I was wondering when you do move will the podcast be still done with Kings or will it be done in conjunction with your new college?Also way back in March you promised to put up the talk you did with sildes .Any news on when that will be up?
Kind Regards
David
In reply to Readings before embarking on an undergrad degree by Peter Adamson
Congratulations on appointment
Congrats on the Munich appointment and thanks very, very much for this wonderful series so far. It's always interesting and often rather funny. Keep up with the giraffes.
In reply to Dictionary by Peter Adamson
Dictionary
Hi Peter,
I was thinking of the technical terms as there are so many It would be nice while listening if you need to be reminded of a term you could look it up and then if required you could maybe link to wikeapedia or we could and look it up further .
Thanks
David
I love your podcast so much.
I love your podcast so much. So much that I needed to comment just to say that. Please keep up the subtle humor and thoughtful analysis.
Many thanks!!!
Hello Prof Adamson
Many thanks for your excellent podcasts.
With my very best wishes and kind regards,
avi
I am interested in Maimonides and the Islamic Philosophy.
great podcasts!!
Peter,
I haven't reached the Neoplatonisms yet, but I just wanted to thank you for such interesting podcasts.
Actually, I skip some and I've only reached Aristotle. I guess I'll have to go back and read his ethics. Also Plato's Republic.
At this rate, it will take you years and years to reach the 21th century, which is too bad.
Maybe you could just cheat a bit and dash through the Middle Ages and begin again with Descartes.
I doubt that you will do that. You seem like a very conscientious person.
I prefer the Greeks myself. I have the theory that the Greeks lied to themselves less than we do today and much much less than the thinkers of the Middle Ages.
Platonic dialogues
Peter,
I am on a mission to acquire all of the Platonic dialogues so I can ease my mind in between stressful bouts of MCAT studying this summer. What translations or collections do you recommend to get my collection started? Thanks much.
In reply to Platonic dialogues by James Woods
Thankyou Thankyou Thankyou
I listen to these on my iPhone on the drive to & from work.
They are the best thing since DebateGod.org
Thank you SO SO much for making them.
I can't tell you how much I look forward to my 25min drive now- I'm often gutted when I actually get home & end up sitting in the car outside my flat for 10mins till you've finished the episode! 8-D
THANK YOU.
In reply to Thankyou Thankyou Thankyou by Ben
...and thanks for listening
Gosh, you're welcome! Glad you are enjoying them so much. I seem to be getting less disciplined and letting the episodes get slightly longer (partially because people recommended I should talk slower). So maybe that's why you wind up waiting in your car for me to get through it!
Peter
Hello Peter, do you think
Hello Peter, do you think you'll be taking on philosophers from different cultures? It would be trail-blazing if you did that via this podcast series.
In reply to Hello Peter, do you think by Linda
Different cultures
Hi,
I'll definitely be doing Islamic philosophy at great length (that's actually my main area of expertise). Not really planning to do Indian and Chinese philosophy, but you never know... I realize it would be better to include them but I know almost nothing about them so it's daunting.
Thanks for listening!
Peter
In reply to Different cultures by Peter Adamson
I was actually thinking about
I was actually thinking about Islamic philosophy, since I was just reading about Al-Andalus, and some other bits and pieces. I didn't want to put any pressure though!
I'll be looking forward to it then. Oh and thank you for the quick reply.
Linda
Thanks so much for doing this
Thanks so much for doing this podcast, it's been incredibly interesting and informative.
One question though - what do you think of Xenophon? I know you briefly address him in a Socrates episode, and you kind of write him off as a philosopher but say he's great for other things. But you never really address what that is! Anyhow, if you have any time to elaborate, that'd be great.
In reply to Thanks so much for doing this by Max
Xenophon
Hi,
Thanks to you and the previous poster for the encouragement! As far as Xenophon goes I'm not really an expert on him, but he is definitely an important source on Greek history. For what it's worth I do think that his portrayal of Socrates is interesting and provides an interesting corrective or balance to Plato's: if we are interested in the real historical Socrates I reckon that Xenophon's version is likely to be at least as close to accuracy as Plato's.
Peter
History of Philosophy Podcasts
Thanks for the podcast series. I appreciate the time and effort you invest in each episode. Your exposition is clear and easy to follow. I very much appreciate the sly humor and puns that help to enliven the series.
I discovered your podcasts while searching for the subject of philosophy. I majored in philosophy many years ago. Your podcasts help to refresh my recollection.
Please keep up the great work. I hope to live long enough to listen to the entire series, which will no doubt total several hundred episodes. WOW! What a huge project to take on.
Best wishes,
Dave Macher
Thanks so much for these
Thanks so much for these podcasts. It's been awesome learning about the history of philosophy, and the origins of a subject that I think is great. I was just curious because you said in the first episode concerning the sceptics that you'll finally be up to Descartes in five years. Will you actually continue up to Descartes, and how long would it take? I would love to hear a podcast on the more contemporary thinkers(relative to the ones being discussed), especially Kant.
In reply to Thanks so much for these by Matthew
The far-off moderns
Hi there - glad you are enjoying the podcasts. I was kind of kidding about 5 years until Descartes but, to do some more serious reckoning, I am planning on reaching medieval philosophy at somewhere around episode 115. I will do Islamic medieval first, then Jewish, then Latin Christian medieval. That seems to me like it would take me up to episode 200, though I haven't planned all of it out in detail. Since I do almost 50 episode per year that therefore means at least two more years until I arrive at the Renaissance. At the moment I do plan to keep going from there, though, well into modernity -- at least as far as Kant and perhaps further. Once I get past medieval my competence starts to tail off, so it would be harder, but also a real learning experience and challenge for me, plus it seems silly to stop before reaching such greats as Descartes, Hume, Kant etc. I may need to slow down to one episode every two weeks once I get past medieval, just to make the project manageable, since I'd need to do more background research at that point.
Thanks again!
Peter
Ancient Medicine!
Really so talented work,Thanks so much for your efforts,but can you make an episode just about the history of ancient Greek medicine?!
Thanks in advance!
In reply to Ancient Medicine! by Enas
Ancient medicine
Hi -- do you mean something more than the episode that went up today? I don't think I'll get more into the topic than that, but I hope that this episode (plus next week's interview about Galen) cover the subject pretty well in its own right, as well as the relation between medicine and philosophy.
Peter
In reply to Ancient medicine by Peter Adamson
Ancient Medicine!
Yes,I mean to get into the history of ancient Greek medicine as I am interested more in that part! Anyway am waiting for the next(Galen is very important source),Thanks so much for your efforts!
Enas
In reply to Ancient Medicine! by Enas
Even more ancient medicine
Ah, I see. Well, this is after all a podcast about philosophy, so I think I will not branch out into other fields for their own sake. But apart from these two episodes I would highly recommend V. Nutton's book listed in the "further reading" on today's episode, that is a comprehensive look at the topic in its own right rather than with a philosophical slant.
In reply to Even more ancient medicine by Peter Adamson
Thanks!!
Okay then,I got your point! Thanks for your recommendation for this book and am gonna search for it!
Regards,
Enas
Megarians?
Peter, would you happen to know where I can find any scholarly information on the Megarians? I've decided to reread the Theaetetus and I figured it might be helpful to know a little about them. The most information I have on them right now is from Cornford's commentary, but he doesn't have a lot to say about their doctrines. Or have their ideas more or less been lost in the mists of time?
In reply to Megarians? by JKE
Megarians
There's a useful section on them in the Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, so I would point you to that in the first instance. There are also studies of them/collections of testimonia in French (R. Muller) and German (Döring).
In reply to Philosophy podcasts by Anonymous
Thank you so much for
Thank you so much for starting this series! I've been following since the beginning and have shared them with my fellow philosophers at Western Connecticut State University. I hope you can keep on going through the Medieval period, the Renaissance, and beyond.
Philosophy podcasts
I just wanted to say thank you so much for creating this fantastic resource; your podcasts are hugely enjoyable and informative!
short compliment
Hi Peter. I'm looking forward to the interview with A. A. Long, and agree that there couldn't be a more impressive finale for a series of talks on Hellenistic philosophy. I must add however, that I enjoyed your podcasts on Plato more than those on Epictetus and Seneca, where you gave us little of their philosophy in their own words and instead spent the entire time summarizing. I felt we lost some insight into the personality and genius of both Hellenistic authors, as well as their lasting appeal over so many centuries. I'm also looking forward to your presentations of Arab philosophy, as it seems to be an area you know something about. Is this due to a focus on neo-Platonism? That continuity of thought seems important to you. This observation is based only on having heard you on both your own podcast and 'In Our Time', rather than looking at say, your published work, so perhaps it's misguided, but that's my sense anyway. Thanks for reading this far, and for a wonderful podcast. Not that it matters, but since you don't know what kind of audience your effort has attracted, I'll just mention I'm a currently unemployed cancer patient who is largely housebound (I'm sure my situation enhances my interest in Stoicism and Epictetus in particular), and your podcasts help me stay in an intellectually stimulating world rather than one filled with the drudgery of endless medical procedures, etc. Thanks for that. best wishes isaac dumiel (some yahoo formerly at large but now housebound in Seattle WA USA)
In reply to short compliment by isaac dumiel
Continuity
Thanks very much for the message -- you are right that continuity is important for me, in fact in a way it is the goal of the whole project ("without any gaps") and that is no doubt in part because I work especially on topics that tend to get skipped, namely Neoplatonism and philosophy in the Islamic world.
I'd be interested to know more what you would have liked to hear in the Roman Stoics episodes -- obviously I had to cover a lot of ground in each episode (true in pretty much every episode of course) but if anything I was more worried about summarizing in Plato than with these guys, because with Plato I had to go over what happens in each dialogue whereas the Roman Stoic episodes were, I thought, more about the main themes that emerge. Or maybe you just want more detail? (After all I did 19 on Socrates and Plato, only one on Seneca!)
Thanks for listening! And I wish you all the best for a speedy recovery.
Peter
Apuleius?
Hi Peter,
I wonder if Apuleius, author of "The Golden Ass" and "The God Of Socrates", would figure in your podcast as a "Middle" Platonist? I'm looking forward to your discussion of these intermediary figures, since most studies tend to skip over them in a quick, dismissive paragraph!
In reply to Apuleius? by Mark
Apuleius
Time Line
Hi Peter,
Just seen the timeline section. Thankyou for putting this up there I think it will be a great reference point. Enjoyed the last two episodes on Cicero very much.
Kind Regards
David
So, would I be correct in
So, would I be correct in supposing that Middle Platonism/ Neo-Pythagoreanism is soon to follow upon the skepticism episodes?
In reply to So, would I be correct in by JKE
Middle Platonism
You bet! Episode 78 (which is already written). I'm just working now on episodes on Philo of Alexandria (79) and Plutarch (80) and there will also be an interview with an expert on Middle Platonism, namely Jan Opsomer. Glad you are curious about these subjects, I have been finding these scripts really interesting to write.
In reply to Middle Platonism by Peter Adamson
Sounds great! As I'm sure you
Sounds great! As I'm sure you can imagine, we didn't spend much time (like, any...) on the Middle Platonists in my undergrad history of philosophy course, the little I do know about them has been in my own readings, so I'm looking forward to hearing a couple professionals discuss the matter.
Pearls one stumbles upon in the world wide web
Before my grandchildren are born and come of age to enjoy listening to the MP3s I've downloaded, I'm taking delight myself in your special style. Hopefully it won't sound void if I say that the world is a better place with you (and your podcast) around.
Now, I know what you're thinking (smiles): that I must be listening to them from time to time! Well no, actually I listen to an episode a day, and then again and again; and every time there's a new aspect, a new idea popping up from among the layers of your argumentative discourse: Antiquity revived.
Receive my most heartfelt thanks,
eugenia_dg
In reply to Pearls one stumbles upon in the world wide web by eugenia_dg
Thanks
Thanks to you and Ken for the nice comments! Glad that you are enjoying the series.
In reply to Thanks by Peter Adamson
Spreading the word
Dear Peter,
There's a bit more to enjoying your series (I've managed to download them all), and I feel you must know about it: I pasted the page link into my educational blog for all my students to have access to the real thing.
Would you say yes to my transcribing one of your episodes (Thaetetus would be just right for the time being)and so use it as a basis for an entry on knowledge and belief?
Sincerely yours,
eugenia
In reply to Spreading the word by eugenia_dg
Transcription
Many Thanks
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the podcast. I can only imagine the amount effort you put into this project. Your work has rekindled my love of thinking.
Many thanks.
Ken
Plato
Dear Peter.
I am deep into your fascinating programs on Plato. Perusing in my library, we don't have the book you recommend, but instead A. E. Taylor, Plato: the Man and His Work. Has it been supersede or is it still a good introduction?
Thanks!
Cristina
In reply to Plato by Cristina
A.E. Taylor
Dear Cristina,
I've had to look it up because I don't own a copy myself. This is from the early 20th century so it is certainly dated, I have a soft spot for scholarship from this era and of course it's deeply grounded in a classicist education such as hardly anyone gets nowadays (in fact I think he's presenting Plato more from a classicist rather than philosophical point of view, which I say in the full knowledge that this is a false dichotomy). Probably not the best thing you can read but it might not be a bad start.
Peter
In reply to A.E. Taylor by Peter Adamson
Dear Peter: Thank you very
Dear Peter:
Thank you very much for looking up the book. I will tap into interlibrary loan, so I can get your recommendations.
Thanks again!
Cristina
Thanks!
This is a truly wonderful work you are doing. Thank you! Perhaps someone has already asked you this in the comments but supposing, despite your efforts, that you do find a gap or would like to add an interview that fills out the picture even more, do you have a way of adding new episodes that address topics treated at an earlier time? Thanks.
Matthew Miller
In reply to Thanks! by Matthew
Retrospective gap-filling
Hi Matthew,
Actually no one has asked me that before but I have given it some thought. It would be no problem to put it up on the website here, and it could go onto the RSS feed like other podcasts albeit that it would come out of order. It would need to be numbered something like "episode 66a", which is not an insurmountable problem of course. I tend to think I will not do it though, unless I've missed out something that really should have been covered. (Given that people keep saying that they are looking forward to the 19th century and stuff like that, I suspect a lot of listeners would be happier if I just keep pressing on!)
By the way there will also, I hope, be a book version in which I could address themes or figures that didn't get enough attention.
Thanks,
Peter
The end?
Hi Peter,
Thanks for these podcasts; I enjoy them on my long commute! One question though, can you ever post the last podcast? When does the history of philosophy end? Xeno may have his revenge after all!
Adam
In reply to The end? by Adam
The end
Hi Adam,
Yes, that's a fair point! I have imagined myself saying, "this week on the history of philosophy our topic is... this week in the history of philosophy." But seriously, I will probably try to choose some kind of ending point that makes sense, I've thought about Kant as a good stopping point but I would love to cover Hegel, Nietzsche, Frege, etc. So perhaps I will go to the end of the 19th century or something. Anyway this isn't a problem I need to solve any time soon!
Thanks for listening,
Peter
In reply to The end by Peter Adamson
Perhaps Kierkegaard's
Perhaps Kierkegaard's diatribe against the Hegelians finally writing the final chapter?
In reply to Perhaps Kierkegaard's by Adam
Ending topics
Or the later Wittgenstein, who wanted everyone to be cured of doing philosophy -- that would be an appropriate place to finish!
In reply to Ending topics by Peter Adamson
Wittgenstein
Peter, if you could make any Wittgenstein, early or later, intelligible, that would be amazing! I had a great deal of trouble with him; I went to him expecting the linguistic turn, but got the Brown and Blue books instead. Wrong work to start with? I couldn't even tell you one sentence of what I read.
In reply to Wittgenstein by Adam
Wittgenstein
Hi Adam,
You'll have a long wait until I get to Wittgenstein! I think probably the more obvious work to start with is the "Philosophical Investigations" though that is in many ways a reaction to his own "Tractatus" -- and that's really hard. I've heard it said that the later work "On Certainty" is a bit more feasible if you want a text to begin with but he is not at all within my expertise so I'm not the best source of advice here. If you are really keen to look into him then I can ask expert colleagues for a tip.
Peter
In reply to Wittgenstein by Peter Adamson
Thanks, Peter! I'm not
Thanks, Peter! I'm not really that keen on taking up Wittgenstein again, at the moment, so no need to call the cavalry. And honestly, I'm looking more forward to Boethius right now than anything else.
In reply to Thanks, Peter! I'm not by Adam
Boethius
Hi Adam,
In that case you don't have so long to wait -- Boethius is scheduled for episode 110. Thanks for listening!
Peter
In reply to Boethius by Peter Adamson
Kenny on the above...
I've just finished reading Sir Anthony Kenny's "A New History of Western Philosophy" and I thought he was very good on most of the philosophers mentioned in this thread. He made me want to run out and buy Boethius!
In reply to Ending topics by Peter Adamson
Why not finish with Hadot and late Foucault?
As the work of Pierre Hadot, and late Michael Foucault, is heavily influenced by the Ancient Philosophers, why not "finish" there, at the beginning...
In reply to The end by Peter Adamson
The Present
I hope that you will go all the way through to Sartre, Derida, post-modernism, Plantinga ('cos I've heard of him!), and others.
Neoplatonist texts
Hi Peter,
I realize that, once again, I'm getting way ahead of things, but you seem to be the individual who'd know about the availability of Neoplatonist texts. I've read Plotinus, as well as the recent Paulist Press edition of the "pseudo"-Dionysius, but would very much like to move on to Proclus and later writers such as (in particular) Scotus Erigena. Problem: can't find texts! Or, at least, texts that aren't selling for $100+.
Doing some web research, I discovered a site called The Thomas Taylor Trust, which is dedicated to republishing works of Proclus, Iamblichus, etc., which were translated by Thomas Taylor in the later 18th century. They seem to be priced relatively reasonably, and in excellent, leather bound edition as well. Question: have you ever come across any of these, and is the quality of translation adequate? I know that Stephen MacKenna famously disparaged Taylor's Plotinus translations, but this may well have been due to professional jealousy.
Any light you could shed on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.
Mark
In reply to Neoplatonist texts by Mark
Neoplatonists in (English) translation
Hi Mark,
Well you've come to the right place. As a good point to start from I'd recommend Dillon and Gerson's "Neoplatonist Philosophy: Introductory Readings," which is from Hackett and in paperback so not expensive. It has some Plotinus but also later figures like Iamblichus and Proclus are included. Also very useful are the three volumes of Sourcebooks edited by Sorabji for Duckworth, called "The Philosophy of the Commentators"; when I teach Neoplatonism I draw on these two things to cover all of late antiquity.
In terms of single authors, the Prometheus Trust has been reissuing affordable reprints of books by authors like Iamblichus, Proclus and Damascius. You should also be able to get Proclus' "Elements of Theology" in paperback from Oxford, the Dodds translation and commentary. There are also paperback translations of Proclus' commentaries on the Elements of Euclid and on the Parmenides.
All of these would be better than the Thomas Taylor which is, as you can imagine somewhat out of date and not based on such reliable editions though this is of course to take nothing away from his achievement which was astonishing in its day! I'd say his translations are still useful in terms of getting a broad understanding of what happens in the texts but if you want details the above recommendations would be better.
Peter
Part 000
Hi Peter,
1) your podcasts are really great!!!
2) but I miss an introduction to the Presocratics. Their philosophy didn't emerge out of nothing. Is it possible to add something about the influences of their philosophy and perhaps something about the "Achsenzeit" (China, India, Greece). [There is place for the number 000 :) ]
Ulli
In reply to Part 000 by Ulli
Episode 000
Dear Ulli,
That's not a bad idea! Actually if I were doing it over again perhaps I would do a first episode that was a general introduction to the Presocratics, like the one I did introducing Hellenistic philosophy. But on the other hand there is not that much to say about Thales so I did spend most of episode 1 talking generally about the Presocratics (e.g. that we read them as fragments and testimonia).
Anyway I think I don't want to go more into "pre-philosophical" culture more than I already have; I'd rather press on with the rest of the history of philosophy, plus I think that talking about possible influences from earlier on the Presocratics is a bit speculative apart from Homer and Hesiod (cf episode 3 on Xenophanes).
I really ought to do Indian philosophy though, I am feeling increasingly bad about that. (Chinese philosophy too.) Maybe I will return to it someday but it would be a steep learning curve for me to deal with it at all adequately.
Thanks for listening!
Peter
Dear Peter: I have just
Dear Peter:
I have just started listening to your series from the beginning, and I find all the podcast magnificent! Listening to the program on Heraclitus while doing the dishes really lights up that menial task. The program of Xenophanes was brilliant.
I am just perusing and downloading further episodes, and I see that you are currently with Marcus Aurelius (one of my favourites). But, what about Cicero? I know that many scholars do not regard him as a "true" philosopher, rather just a transmissor of knowledge from Greece to Rome, but many of his views are quite interesting, especially in that mixture of Roman customs and Greek philosophy.
Please, keep up this good work! And thanks!
Cristina
In reply to Dear Peter: I have just by Cristina
Cicero
Dear Cristina,
Never fear, Cicero is coming soon: episode 71 followed by an interview episode (72) about him which I'm actually recording tomorrow, if all goes well. The idea is to cover him as part of the series of episodes about the ancient skeptics, which will be episodes 69-73.
Glad you're enjoying the series!
Peter
What's the answer
Hi Peter
I enoy your podcasts very much indeed. They are really well delivered, and without exception are both jam packed with information and at the same time you manage to prevent the whole thing from getting turgid. So congratulations, and thanks.
I am struggling a bit though, with the point of it all. I am (as you will clearly be able to tell) completely unversed in philosophy, but as far as I can tell we seem to be still struggling with the same questions as we were in the days of Plato (I am thinking here about the episode about whether truth is relative or absolute). have we solved any anything over the last few thousand years? Or am I asking the wrong question, and is philosophy a skill, how to think?
Anyway, whatever the answer to that is, the journey itself is fun, so thanks for all your time and effort, it's all worth it (or it is from my point of view anyway!)
David
In reply to What's the answer by David
The point of it all
Hi David,
Well, a while ago Philosophy Bites did an episode where they asked a bunch of philosophers "what is philosophy?" and you get to hear dozens of answers. (It's here, episode 139.) My answer there, which kind of explains why I do history of philosophy, is that philosophy is the study of the trade-offs, the costs and benefits if you will, of making certain claims about certain kinds of questions. Which kind of questions? To oversimplify, it is the kind of question that can't just be answered by empirical investigation (so for instance the question, "how many moons does Jupiter have" is not a philosophical question).
To illustrate what I mean by "trade-offs", here's an example from what we've already covered: if you reject the possibility of non-being, you wind up with Parmenides' view; if you accept it, then you can be an ancient atomist. Both views have their problems, and what these Pre-Socratics were doing was exploring the costs and benefits of believing that there is or isn't such a thing as non-being. So for me the history of philosophy is the story of (very intelligent) people making moves and counter-moves, exploring these costs and benefits.
I don't think we necessarily get closer and closer to the truth - because philosophy moves in fads and cycles, so that what is happening now is just the most recent part of the history of philosophy. But the more we study the whole history of philosophy, the better we understand the possible moves than can be made.
It's not quite as simple as that, because for instance philosophy is also affected by increasing knowledge of empirical facts, especially through science. And of course there is a lot to say about philosophy as a cultural phenomenon, how it interacted with historical events, and so on -- something I'm trying to include as I go along, rather than talking only about the ideas in the abstract. But that's my short answer to your difficult question!
Glad you are enjoying the series!
Peter
spilt soup
Hi Peter,
Just listening to an old in our time episode. Did yo miss out Zeno and spilt soup.
Looking foroward to Sundays Episode.
David
Wolfson
Have you read H. A. Wolfson's book on Spinoza? It's the best out there.
Histories of philosophy
Hi Peter,
Your podcasts are magnificent and I look forward to every new one you post on your site..
I wanted to know if you recommend any specific author or work dedicated to the History of Philolosophy. I apologize in advance if this question is inappropropriate to ask of a professor and scholar of ancient and medieval philosophy such as yourself, who has dedicated considerable time and effort in analazing the primary sources of ancient thought. But have your read tomes such as Bertrand Russell's "The History of Western Philosophy" or Fr. Copleston's series? Another popular one is Will Durant's "The Story of Philosophy". Durant's monumental "The Story of Civilization", though a single man's rendition of the encycopedia of history, has so much energy and richness of prose, that it has increased my interest in the study of history as I have read it over many years. In a lot of ways, your podcasts in philosophy remind me of this work, in your unwavering ability to make the subject riveting and fresh. I know these works are often not true "histories", but one person's interpretation of the ideas behind these ancient writers. Listening to your podcasts piqued my interest in reading Russell's work, though I find it again more an editorial than a true history. In sum, I think you have done a far better job than Bertrand Russell at keeping your history podcasts unbiased, with many guest speakers to give additional points of view!
Lastly, I wanted to thank you for taking on the challenge of making this podcast one that will be "without any gaps." I have listened to your talks on the internet about Averroes and I know you are a foremost scholar on Avicenna. Being Persian myself, I have a particular fondness for this latter and can't wait until I hear your story. I see so many echoes of Epicurus in poets like Omar Khayyam, and even Plato in Rumi. I look forward to learning about all of these "gaps" that are all-too-frequently omitted from so many compendia and syllabi on the topic.
Best wishes,
Bahman
In reply to Histories of philosophy by Bahman
Histories of philosophy
Hi Bahman,
Thanks very much! I'm also looking forward to reaching Avicenna of course (and Islamic philosophy in general). A ways to go until then though!
I agree about Russell; a better (though certainly outdated) single-author history is Copleston's which you also mention. More recently Anthony Kenny has written a sweeping history of philosophy. But in general I think (slightly hypocritically, given what I'm doing here!) that if you want to get into this material more deeply than I'm doing in the podcast it's better to choose multi-author volumes, like in the Cambridge Companion series which has a lot of good volumes in it.
Thanks!
Peter
Neoplatonism
Hi Peter,
First of all, thanks for the fantastic podcast! I can't tell you how much I really appreciate your efforts.
Second, without jumping too far ahead, when it comes to the age of Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus, etc., will you be including all of these individuals in the podcast? Or will there be a distinction made in the case of some of these individuals (Pseduo-Dionysius springs to mind) between clear cut philosophy and the nebulous realm of theology?
In reply to Neoplatonism by S.D.
Neoplatonism
Hi - As it turns out Neoplatonism is one of my primary research interests. So there will be quite a lot on the Neoplatonists in the podcast, with numerous episodes on Plotinus, individual episodes on Porphyry, Iamblichus, Proclus, several Neoplatonist commentators and, yes, Pseudo-Dionysius (actually that one is already written). The trickier thing is actually early Christianity but I'll be devoting episodes to both Greek and Latin church fathers, and the Cappadocians, as well as a bunch of episodes on Augustine, for instance (also Philo of Alexandria will get his own episode). I basically take the view that you can't disentangle theology and philosophy starting in late antiquity and running through the medievals, a lot of the most interesting philosophy in fact arises in discussions of things like the Trinity and the Incarnation (and similar points apply in Judaism and Islam).
Hope you enjoy it when we get there!
Peter
In reply to Neoplatonism by Peter Adamson
Sounds terrible! :-)I
Sounds terrible! :-)
I consider theology to be pretend philosophy, in that it is grounded in baseless assumptions.
However, I will approach it as a history lesson rather than an attempt to say anything accurate about existence.
Maybe you can cure me of my bias!
In reply to Sounds terrible! :-)I by Felix
Jesus
Peter, will you be doing an episode of the teachings of Jesus? I have just been reading 'Jesus, interrupted' by Bart Ehrman on the results of up to 300 years of historical consideration of the bible. It suddenly struck me that right about now in your timeline, you should be covering this important philosopher. I'd be hoping that you would, based on the currently historico-critical, widely accepted, picture of the man, be telling us what he is thought to have preached and be relating that to ideas of other thinkers to state was was (or was not) new or interesting. Maybe you included Jesus in your comment above when you mention your intention to talk about the church fathers? (You most probably were since it would be a peculiar oversight to omit the founder of the religion!) Thanks
In reply to Jesus by Felix
Jesus
I've actually thought about that a bit, especially because there was another philosophy podcast -- I think it was the Australian "Philosopher's Zone" -- that did an episode on him as a philosopher. To be honest I think I won't devote an episode to him as a philosopher per se but I am going to do numerous episodes on late ancient Christianity so I will presumably say something about this towards the beginning. Mostly though I feel that the teachings of Jesus are a bit above my pay grade.
In reply to Jesus by Peter Adamson
Historical Jesus
Peter I've just darted to you lecture on Hellenism and the one on Cynics and was hoping that the Jesus before the Christians swallowed him up and changed his teaching might have got a look in. The smart-arse turn of phrase that is so charasteric of him in the quips in the Gospel of Thomas and in the early Jesus Movements identified by scholars as the Q document sugest that Jesus was a practiced Cynic or Stoic or was playing whit his own theme in Greek philosophy.
The Pauline Christians yoked the Greek and Jewish lore together and giving him the status of Plato's demiurge. Christian apology and writing seems to be a different thing to Yesua/Joshua/Jesus's philosophy.
Time line
Hi Peter ,
I was wondering if you could put a time line of People and events so we can keep tabs of who is who and era's so us laymen can keep up and not get to confused.
Great podcast this week by the way.
Regards
David
In reply to Time line by David
Time line
Hi David,
Yes, that's actually an idea that Julian, who designed the website, suggested at some point too. I'll talk to him about it and we'll see if it's feasible.
Thanks,
Peter
podcast
Hi Peter - thanks for the excellently accessible podcasts - combined with Librivox audio versions of the primary texts they open up a whole new world. All power to you.
Toga
Hi Peter,
Thanks very much for your wonderful podcast. It's very accessible. I began listening to it with little interest of the subject, now I head straight to the philosophy section when I walk into a bookstore. I've bought the 'The Presocratic Philosophers' as recommended and the 'Complete Works of Plato'.
Rather than read through Plato like a novel, my girlfriend and I are going to take a few hours out each week to dress up in togas and sandals and perform each dialogue in my flat, followed by a discussion of the dialogue. Last week we did 'Euphythro' which was very successful, although we had no audience to confirm that.
My question is - are we historically accurate in wearing togas (white bedsheets), sandals and fake beards, if not can you recommend suitable alternative attire?
Many thanks,
Andrew
In reply to Toga by Andrew
Historically authentic dress
Hi Andrew,
That's wonderful, thanks! Sadly I have to inform you that the toga is a purely Roman phenomenon, so it is not what you want to wear to be a Greek philosopher. Needless to say sartorial issues are not my main expertise but you probably want to shoot for a "himation" which is an ancient Greek cloak. This hangs over one shoulder and sort of wraps horizontally around the body. If you Google Image the word "himation" you'll see some examples (I just tried it). A good point of reference would be the fantastic Parthenon marbles since many of the gods etc are wearing these cloaks.
I think bedsheets are still legit as long as you wrap them the right way!
By the way when you are done you can decide whether or not to cut up the cloak, because Aristotle's gives "this cloak will be cut" as an example of a possibly-true proposition.
Thanks for listening,
Peter
Cicero
Dear Peter Adamson, I'm just messaging you to make sure not to forget Cicero!
Also, I'm just wondering whether you will later be giving any attention in future to Crescas and Gersonides?
In reply to Cicero by Monad
Cicero
As it happens the Cicero episode is the one I am writing now. If all goes according to plan there will also be an interview episode about him so there will be 2 devoted to him.
My tentative list of topics in the future includes a long list on Jewish medieval thought and I have an episode planned on post-Maimonidean developments which would include Crescas and Gersonides; actually Crescas may get his own episodes. But yes, they will be covered. ("Without any gaps"!)
Thanks for listening!
Peter
Change
Hi All
I thought it was time I made a posting to this forum. I have been listening for a year or more and I finally thought I should say something. The only thing is that I have had a few drinks, however I have heard that doing philosophy when you are drunk is the best time , yet I do remember a pre-socratic saying something along the lines of "if you are drunk your soul is going out and therefore not thinking straight." or something like that. (I have a feeling that it was Heraclitus - which is strange given the later part of this posting).
The more I listen to this podcast the more I am thinking that we don't have an answer to anything. Every time you think you are heading in the right direction it turns out that you were not. I am guessing the best example of this is "Frankenstein" ( I know this was not his name, but he was a philosopher who had a view early in his life and then did a 180 and thought he was wrong. In fact I think he is referred to as old and new Frankenstein.) Hopefully you know who I am talking about he lived sometime in the 1800 - 1900's.
Anyway as I said the more I listen to this podcast the more I am thinking that we don't have an answer to anything (you will notice that I don't say "I don't know anything") and I am starting to think the reason why I don't have any answer is because there is no one answer. Or more to the point there is no one answer which is standing still which I can learn. It just won't stand still like a2 + b2 = c2. It just seems to keep moving.
I want to know the answer but it looks like I will not because no one has in the last 3000 years so its not likely that I will find the answer. Why does this happen … could it be because things never stop changing …. including the answer (if in fact there is one …. or maybe there are many for each moment in time)? Maybe the whole thing is to listen to the Logos?
When I first listened to the early episode on Heraclitus I thought … yes the road up and down are one in the same (so what) and I also thought sea water is healthy for fish and poison for men (again so what) and finally yep the river has water flowing through it so what? However I am now thinking …… actually things are changing all the time and in fact no one can tell me or predict the direction of the flow, which is ok because all you have to do it listen to the logos. (By the way my example of Logos is that my wife sometimes knows thatI really need to talk and get things off my chest .... but now is not the time …. she knows that because she is listening to the logos.)
I suspect this is not making much sense mainly because of the level of vodka in my body, damping my soul. The point is that I wanted to say please keep this podcast going. I have never officially studied philosophy and this podcast is giving me a huge amount of joy (not in a strong hellenistic manner ) but please keep it going.
Thanks
Brad
In reply to Change by Brad Beach
Frankenstein?
Dear Brad,
Thanks for that rather entertaining comment! The philosopher you have in mind is Wittgenstein, I think.
As for whether there is an answer I tend to think that it depends on the question; not all philosophical questions are the same in this regard. Some may have discoverable answers, some non-discoverable answers, and some no answer at all (but the last group are probably just badly formed questions).
Peter
In reply to Change by Brad Beach
I know exactly how you feel
I know exactly how you feel Brad. It's like there's an unexplored world out there and it's impossible to decipher. Peter, thank you for your podcast, your parental guidance is essential to my questioning of the given truth.
James
Do you include escepticism?
Hi I'am a mexican student and I am excited with your blog¡
My english is no good but I want to ask you, do you have a place in the blog dedicated to the ancient scepticism? I think in Pirron, Enesidemo, Arcesilao, like instances of this philosophý view. I don't see it.
The best for you blog¡
In reply to Do you include escepticism? by Rosario
Scepticism
Hi - yes indeed, Scepticism is starting in just a couple of weeks. I decided it was better to put them after the Stoics since they respond to the Stoics. There will be three episodes on them, numbers 69, 70 and 73, with 71 and 72 devoted to Cicero (that's the plan anyway).
Peter
In Our Time
Hi
Just to let everybody know in our time is doing a week long series on the wrttien word on BBC Radio 4 at 9 am Mon- Friday this week.
David
In reply to In Our Time by David
In Our Time: "Written Word"
Yes, just listened to the first episode this morning. Really good. Bragg remarked that writing is the "most important idea in the history of mankind" or something to that effect. So much for sliced bread!
More seriously, I was struck by the fact that the first extant writing is about 5-6K years ago, and the first philosophy 2.5K years ago. So philosophy has existed for almost half as long as writing itself!
Question on pythagoras
Dear Peter,
I have just started listening to your podcast and it is amazing. I have been meaning to systemacially go through philosophy and this is a great place to start. Thank you for taking the time and effort to do this podcast. I have just finished episode 4 about pythagoras and had a question if you don't mind.
I have encountered the idea that pythagoras believed in re-incarnation in a greek religion class I took in undergrad. Both the idea of re-incarnation and the fact that certain spiritual mystics possess memories of past life is central in hinduism, buddhism, and mysticism in general, as I am sure you are aware. I was wondering if you could comment on any similarities between pythagorianism and the hindu/buddhist ideas on re-incarnation? Also, was there any known contact between these regions at this period in time?
Thanks so much,
Abhinav
In reply to Question on pythagoras by Abhinav Arneja
Reincarnation
Hi Abhinav,
Thanks for the kind comments (also to the previous poster, that was a very nice first comment of the year!).I think there's reasonably good evidence for belief in reincarnation among the ancient Pythagoreans -- if not for Pythagoras himself (about whom there is very little strong evidence anyway) then definitely Empedocles, for instance. He was influenced by the Pythagorean tradition and you may still be getting to my episode on him, but there's a great fragment which makes it clear he believes in human-animal reincarnation.
The question of influence from the Indian tradition is trickier; this is a question that recurs throughout the Greek tradition. More plausible, I think, when we get a bit later -- for instance there is actual evidence from the ancient world linking Pyrrho, the founder of Skepticism, to India. And Plotinus (3rd c AD) is sometimes alleged to have been brought into contact with Eastern ideas while on a military expedition. It's very hard to believe that there would have been influence prior to Alexander the Great, because of the huge distances involved and the lack of trade between the two spheres.
I have to admit that I'm broadly pretty skeptical about connections of this kind anyway. I've never seen a piece of smoking gun evidence for influence of Indian thought on Greek philosophy, and several things I've read on the subject reached negative or inconclusive conclusions (if a conclusion can be inconclusive). This is incidentally one reason I don't feel too guilty (though I do feel somewhat guilty!) for not being in a position to cover Indian thought in this series of podcasts. To me it is a different story, and although the Indian tradition is clearly "philosophical" in the sense that it covers a lot of the same issues, sometimes with striking parallels, it is not part of the continuous historical development that starts with the Pre-Socratics.
By the way once we get to philosophy in the Islamic world we do have solid evidence of intellectual contacts between a Greek-influenced tradition and the Indian philosophical tradition, but even there the influence seems to be pretty minimal as far as any impact on actual philosophical ideas. Al-Biruni, a contemporary of Avcienna (10th c AD) wrote a work called "al-Hind" ("India") in which he clearly saw himself as bringing Indian ideas and information about India to an Arabic-speaking populace, pretty much for the first time in any detail.
Thanks again,
Peter
Great Podcast
Wow - I've become a fan. HoP is comprehensive yet presented in a very listener friendly and pedagogical way (for even the more slow-witted of us). The permeating tone and the present day cultural references and allusions all makes for an attentive, non-elitist - albeit highly informative - and liberating listen.
Thank you! - ML
The Whole and its Parts
Dear Peter
This is the best rendition on a history of Philosophy "ever" especialy when you have someone in to sum up, and we all hear the questions you ask, that we would like to ask. We catch the unity of ideas It sort of puts it all togrther, I wish you could insert a litle more of that, but I realize that might be asking a bit much.
I'v been a practioner of your methods for forty two years (history), but using books, as you can imagine I am unable to ask qustions, I am not a Philosopher but have reviewed many of the ancients you discuss, as a result the podcasts prortray a splendid picture (fill in the gaps for me).
If it were up to me I'd have in on every nite, right after the shocking news we have to bear on TV.
Akolouthos of the ancients
Don
PS. Could I ask who is your favourite.
In reply to The Whole and its Parts by Don
Favorite philosopher
Hi Don,
Thanks very much!
My favorite (I'll stick with American spelling) philosopher is probably Plato, to be honest, in terms of how much I enjoy reading him and how much I get out of him. Like Aristotle he is a thinker whose works have such density that you can literally spend hours thinking about individual sentences; that's relatively rare. Plus you get the amazing ability to produce characters, the complex relationship with the previous tradition, and the beautiful Greek style (the sentences are simply put together wonderfully, something I can appreciate to some extent). And to all that you have to add that the rest of philosophy is, as I've argued in the podcast, pretty much just picking up on themes he was the first to explore. My admiration and love for Plato had a lot to do with getting me into philosophy in the first place (not unusual). This is why I haven't really tried to publish on him, I find him too awe-inspiring.
I should add that I have a special place in my heart too for Avicenna, who for me is the most interesting and important philosopher between, say, Plotinus (another favorite) and Descartes. I like the fact that he was so aware he was a genius, his entirely justified self-regard is rather amusing.
Thanks again!
Peter
In Our Time
Hi Peter,
Just finished listening to in our time .Can not belive you left the story of how Heraclitus died out of your podcast, although if you were to include everything you would be doing a pod cast per day instead of per week. I too think you should go up to the present day. I think it is a good idea about the books though because most of the history of Philosophy books I have read or skimmed do seem a bit dry as apposed to your podcast which of cause is most definatly not. (include the death story in your book).
David
In reply to In Our Time by David
Heraclitus' death
Dear David,
Good point, I'm not sure how I left it out either -- my only excuse is that I was an inexperienced podcaster at the time! I'll add it to the book version for sure.
Thanks,
Peter
Lucretius
Have you read Stephen Greenblatt's book 'The Swerve: How the world became modern?' It is the story of the discovery of a copy of Lucretius's 'On the Nature of Things,' by Poggio Bracciolini in 1417, and how that event helped changed the world. Greenblatt is well know for his books on Shakespeare, and this new one is getting a lot of press here. Just another cosmic coincidence as you take up Lucretius when he is perhaps more visible than he has been in decades.
In reply to Lucretius by Peterr Burns
Greenblatt on Lucretius
Funny you should mention that, I just saw an ad for that book last night. Looks interesting, I wish I had read it in time for writing next week's script. I did read a piece on Lucretius in the "New Yorker" a few months back, which was by him. It seems to be available here.
Getting right into this history thing!
For many years I have had a passing interest in the history of philosophy but I am afraid your podcasts have now got me well and truly hooked! I have now started assembling as much reading material and the SEP articles for each period on my ebook reader and listening again to all the podcasts, doing the readings and getting right into the whole thing.
Luckily my university library has a lot of material, most of which has been slumbering peacefully in the lower basement area for years and is now being taken out and actually read. My home library is also getting a lot of additions.
I just hope I last long enough to get to at least the 18th century!
Transcripts
I'm loving this podcast and check iTunes way too much lo see if the next episode is in.
Is there any chance we can get access to the transcripts? I often want to quote you on Twittter but listening and typing/writing is too much like lecture note-taking which I am sworn against.
In reply to Transcripts by Kevin
Transcripts
Hi Kevin,
Glad you are enjoying it! I actually thought about putting up transcripts but decided against it for two reasons. First I am worried about students all over the world using them as plagiarized essays (I know they can plagiarize from other sources, but still). Second and perhaps more decisively I am hoping to publish the scripts in revised form as a book. Or rather a series of books. Obviously I'll say when and if this project comes to fruition! But I think for this reason I need to avoid putting a written version out into the public domain.
Thanks again!
Peter
In reply to Transcripts by Peter Adamson
Fair enough
Fair enough. Good luck with the books. I'm sure it'll be popular. I'll bite the bullet and take some ntoes
In reply to Transcripts by Peter Adamson
Book
Peter,
I'd be interested to know how many pages a 20 minute epsiode would become when transcribed in to a book. Alternatively, how many pages all your episodes on the Presocratics would generate.
I would imagine that you'll have a fair bit of work to do converting from the podcast genre to the book genre.
Best of luck!
In reply to Book by Felix
Book version
Hi again Felix,
The scripts are each between 3K and 3.5K words long, which means the first volume of the book version, if there is one, would be about 200K (so from Thales to Galen, or so). I've started rewriting scripts as book chapters; not easy, exactly, but I am trying to keep the conversational tone.
Peter
Substance, Modality, Essence and Existence, Monads
This is amazing! Thank you.
I can't wait until you get to Avicenna, and then Spinoza and Leibniz. Can you also do one on H.L. Mencken?
In reply to Substance, Modality, Essence and Existence, Monads by Spinoza
Avicenna and the gang
I can't wait until I get to Avicenna either! Is HL Mencken really a philosopher? I think of him more as a critic and essayist... but maybe you're right. Anyway I suspect that however far I wind up getting I will stop before the 20th century.
In reply to Avicenna and the gang by Peter Adamson
No stopping now ...
Dear Professor Adamson - sorry to tell you this but there is no way you can stop before the 20th Century. We know all know your area of specialiation, but you now have a whole world of followers who are addicted to this program, and there is no way you will be able to sign off before you get to Bourdieu, Rorty, Foucault, Derrida, Lacan or Irigaray (to name a few). Seriously though, no gaps means no gaps, and we are depening on you to lead us through the entire maze! Now about the 21st Century ...
In reply to No stopping now ... by Ornitarinca
Mencken also, no gaps means
Mencken also, no gaps means no gaps. Mencken is easily the most important American thinker ever. He brought Nietzsche to America also.
In reply to Mencken also, no gaps means by Spinoza
Thanks very much for these
Thanks very much for these philosophical lectures addressed to the general reader. An excellent public service. I'll certainly be referring individuals to your site in the future. Best to you, Andrew
A breif history of nothing
Hi Peter,
Thankyou for putting your lecture up for listening. I enjoyed it very much. Any chance of putting it on itunes as I like to relisten while I commute home from work.
Keep up the good work on the podcast it has become one of my highlights of the week along with the history of rome podcast.
David
In reply to A breif history of nothing by David
Downloading the void lecture
Hi David,
Glad you enjoyed it (and the podcast in general). I think I won't put it on iTunes -- since it doesn't exactly fit into the series really. But you can get it into your iTunes easily enough, just right click on the episode (or on a Mac control-click) and hit "save the link" and then you will download it as an .mp3 which you can just move into your iTunes.
Peter
Essential Reading
I am a faithful listener, but I do not have the time or even the inclination to read all your suggested readings. I know this might be difficult, but how about giving one or maybe two essential readings for each of the major philosophers you cover? Maybe this recommendation could be part of the first podcast you give for each of the major figures you cover. Something like, if you can only read one book by or about Aristotle, read this one. I think that I could read one book by Plato, one by Aristotle, etc. This is less than an ideal way to understand the history of philosophy, but better than nothing.
In reply to Essential Reading by Peter Burns
Essential reading
That's an interesting thought. Here's what I'd say for what has been covered so far:
For the Pre-Socratics I'd say the thing to read is:
G.S. Kirk, J.E. Raven and M. Schofield (eds), The Presocratic Philosophers: A Critical History with a Selection of Texts (1983)
For Plato, if you had to read one dialogue I guess the obvious choice is the Republic but my personal favorite dialogue (insofar as that makes sense) is the Theaetetus, and the Gorgias is also wonderful and maybe more appealing as a first encounter.
For Aristotle I would go with the Nicomachean Ethics, probably.
The next big section is Hellenistic Philosophy (starts next Sunday). For that I'd recommend Long and Sedley's "The Hellenistic Philosophers" which gathers evidence for all the main schools of the period.
And of course I hope that these will draw you into reading more of the writings. Last thing: I would always say that it's better to read the original works several times before delving into secondary literature. You want to try to understand it yourself and on its own terms, rather than getting someone's take on it (as I've said before the podcast too is intended to inspire people to find and read this stuff, not as a substitute for reading it).
By the way the "key texts" I recommend for each major thinker or period can always be found under the top page for that part of the series (so, if you click on "Aristotle" at the top of this page for instance).
In reply to Essential reading by Peter Adamson
In a perfect world
"I would always say that it's better to read the original works several times before delving into secondary literature. You want to try to understand it yourself and on its own terms, rather than getting someone's take on it"
That sounds like good advice but is it ever followed?
Most people (99% ?) come to philosophy via secondary sources don't they? And your wonderfull series is a secondary source!
When you are teaching, do your students read the texts before you discuss them?
In reply to In a perfect world by Felix
Primary text reading
Dear Felix,
Yes, ideally at least students do read the texts before we teach, I think that's important. Of course you're right, and especially as I am moving on to the more exotic corners of the history of philosophy I wouldn't expect people to chase down primary texts for everything I cover. But I still hope people will be moved to seek out some things if an episode takes their fancy!
Thanks as ever for your enthusiasm for this project.
Best,
Peter
Lecture/ talk
Peter,
I enjoyed your teaser on the talk you gave any chance of posting the whole lecture for those of us who could not attend.
David
In reply to Lecture/ talk by David
Filling the Gaps
Hi David,
Actually you're not the first person to suggest that... I think I will record it as I speak and then see whether the results are worth putting online (in terms of both content and sound quality).
Thanks,
Peter
Thank you!
Dear Prof. Adamson,
I am a student from Germany (still in high school though) and luckily philosophy can be chosen as a bilingual subject at my school. So far, we have 'only' dealt with English philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell (no offense), and thus left out most of the ancient philosophers, who I do regard as very crucial to modern-day philosophy. With that being said, your podcast has saved me innumerable and exhausting hours in the library doing research on the roots of philosophy. Therefore, I am more than happy that you have put a lot of effort and time in creating this amaizing podcast and given me an equally amaizing train ride.
Best regards
Debora
In reply to Thank you! by Debora
Philosophy in Germany
Dear Deborah,
Thanks for writing, I'm glad that the podcast is helpful. Strange that they aren't exposing you at least to some German philosophers, but maybe it makes sense if they are teaching this option in English.
Thanks and happy listening,
Peter
"without any gaps"
This is an ambitious project, and it looks like it's well on its way to being successful in its goals.
After browsing your website and reading your about section, I'm curious about what this project is trying to accomplish by emphasizing "without any gaps," especially since it is focusing on the "major" (Western) philosophers in history.
1) What does it mean to have no gaps when you've already truncated your project down to just Western philosophy and left out Eastern philosophy?
2) What does it mean to have no gaps when you're focusing on the "major" philosophers and off-handedly mention the lesser-known philosophers when it is precisely these 'lesser-known' ones that would be filling the gaps between the 'giants'?
3) What does it mean to have no gaps when there is no mention of filling the gaps left by the Western tradition itself insofar as it has drawn from a narrow set of groups of people (mostly men of above average socio-economic status who are identified as or associated with being white (to cover the ancients))?
If you do address any of these points in your project, an expanded "about" section could be worthwhile since, as it stands, the non-mention of these issues suggests that they will not be addressed.
As a woman in philsophy myself, it's...hard to see the normal list of men in the past doing philosophy and to see this described as our tradition of philosophy "without any gaps." This implies that the lack of people who share my social idenity isn't a significant gap, which implies that my social group being discouraged or outright excluded from philosophy would not have a significant impact on the quality of philosophy, since it would not create any "gaps". And since my social group is still systamtically discouraged from philosophy (http://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/) this implies that I don't have anything too important to contribute to philosophy, since if lots of people like me were not in philosophy, our absence would leave no gap.
I in no way mean to imply you intended to imply all this. The project probably was not thinking about what having "gaps" would mean in this context. So I encourage the project to consider the various historical and cultural ways in which the history of Western philosophy has "gaps".
- Add new comment
- 177925 views
Alan Saunders - The Philosopher's Zone
Dear Peter and other HOF-WAGs
I just wanted to let those of you outside Australia know that our own brilliant public philosophy broadcaster, Dr Alan Saunders, sadly died suddenly yesterday. Some of you might have heard him via The Philosopher's Zone podcasts on ABC Radio National.
Alan's work, although with an entirely different remit, had a similar tone and approach to Peter's work here. He too had a PhD in philosophy, and did much to spread a love of this pursuit amongst the general population.
In case anyone is interested, there is a tribute to him on the following website. The material presented is from his other show 'By Design' - which looked at issues of architecture and design. But is one last chance to see the man and to hear his beautiful dulcet voice.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-15/abc-radio-philosopher-alan-saunde…