New to Philosophy?

[Hugo Holbling]

When there's no rugby to play or watch, i have to find something to fill my time. To that end, i started writing a series of introductions (http://www.galilean-library.org/philosophy.html) to areas of philosophy. It's aimed at beginners and hopefully will prove to be a useful resource. I'm sure some people here already know about it but i thought i'd provide a link for anyone curious about the subject. Please just let this thread sink if you're not interested.

[viscousmemories]

I've read about half of these introductory essays myself, and I can attest to their excellence. In fact livius and I had previously discussed hosting the entire intro series here in our articles section if you're interested. We have no shortage of available space if you're inclined to allow us.

[LadyShea]

I too have read much of the intro series and found them interesting.

[livius drusus]

They are great reads and seriously illuminating. I've had debates on other boards about philosophy of science that I would never have been able to do without Hugo's intro series.

[Götterdämmerung]

What? Get real, folks. Who takes philosophy seriously these days? :doh:

You're only wasting everyone's time, Hugo Holbling.

[Bluenose]

.... Who takes philosophy seriously these days? :doh: ....

Maybe the thousands of teachers and students involved in all those classes ??? Or the millions who have bought and/or read all those books.

Maybe all the people who post on and read philosophy boards and threads ??

Maybe clowns who make philosophy jokes ??

Not to mention all the intertwined religion/theology/philosophy subjects, or political theory, or Phil of Sci/empiricism, or the overlap with the basics of most academic disciplines.

Or even those who translated, linked and/or posted Hugo's series on non English Web sites :D

[Blake]

(I think Mr. Twilight was kidding, Bluenose, or "taking the piss" out of Hugo. Though I admit I was nonplussed as well until someone told me who they thought he was.)

[viscousmemories]

(I think Mr. Twilight was kidding, Bluenose, or "taking the piss" out of Hugo. Though I admit I was nonplussed as well until someone told me who they thought he was.)
Isn't it "taking a piss at"? Or just "taking a piss"?

/me kills a brain cell trying to wrap his head around micturating euphemisms.

[Larry]

Isn't it "taking a piss at"? Or just "taking a piss"?

* viscousmemories kills a brain cell trying to wrap his head around micturating euphemisms.
Actually I've heard the expression before. I've also heard it said thusly: "You're full of piss." I don't remember what it means exactly, but if I was to take a guess I would say it has something to do with the ego.

Anyways, Hugo, I've read your entire series. Love the stuff enuf to copy, study, and reference it whenever the occasion presents itself. Keep it flowing man. Great stuff!

Larry :)

[HelenM]

Isn't it "taking a piss at"? Or just "taking a piss"?

* viscousmemories kills a brain cell trying to wrap his head around micturating euphemisms.

Actually, no.

"Taking the piss out of" means teasing someone in a way that's intended to be friendly, not mean. It's a typical British bonding ritual :D

It can be abbreviated to "taking the piss" but not "taking a piss" which means urinating. And taking a piss at someone would presumably be an insulting action, not a friendly bonding ritual. Sort of like these... :bikeover: :balls3: (Unless I've missed something, those aren't friendly bonding rituals)

Larry, I can't remember whether "you're full of piss" means "you don't know what you're talking about" or "you've got an over-inflated ego". But then, those two often go together anyway ;)

Reading Hugo's series is one of the things on my to do list that I haven't got to yet. I've heard all the recommendations and believe them.

Helen

[HelenM]

Update: I did it - I read them! :woohoo:

Hugo, you (and the other author) did a great job - they're very readable and informative. Now I can make an informed recommendation of them to others who want an introduction to philosophy.

Helen

[Nil Desperandum]

Full of piss and vinegar means you've got spirit, yes you do. :propeller:

[livius drusus]

Congratulations, Helen. Reading the intro series is a fulfilling experience, is it not? Like trying a new restaurant and finding the entire menu delicious. :)

Full of piss and vinegar means you've got spirit, yes you do. :propeller:

Eh? :eyebrow: Actually, it's prolly best I not know. Carry on.

[HelenM]

Congratulations, Helen. Reading the intro series is a fulfilling experience, is it not? Like trying a new restaurant and finding the entire menu delicious. :)

Yes :). I was interested that some parts were quite familiar to me - for example, logic and the scientific method, from my math and science studies, and I had come across postmodernism because Christians sometimes talk about it, but other parts were very new.

Reading it as well as playing arcade games made my life a little more diverse ;)

Helen

[godfry n. glad]

Full of piss and vinegar means you've got spirit, yes you do. :propeller:

In Australia, "getting pissed" is to become inebriated, whereas in the U.S., "getting pissed" is to become angry.

As for the Holbling introductory pieces, I don't bother. I don't trust the author and he has lost any credibility he might have had with me by his actions. With me, actions speak louder than words. I don't think his work should be lionized here or anywhere else. I think you all should seek other sources for your understanding of philosophical ideas, rather than filtering your understanding through Hugo.

godfry

[livius drusus]

That's an ad hominem though, godfry. Even if Hugo were the biggest cock east of the Mississippi he could still write outstanding introductions to philosophy. I don't know much of anything about my favorite authors; their putative character flaws aren't factors in my appreciation of their work.

The fact remains that I had avoided what I thought was philosophy all of my life, not even realizing that the politics and art, logic and religion I was fascinated by were all philosophy. Hugo's series deftly removed my long-standing fear that I was simply not capable of understanding abstract concepts and gave me a whole new insight into topics I loved and ones I barely knew existed.

It's not lionizing; it's just what happened.

I think you all should seek other sources for your understanding of philosophical ideas, rather than filtering your understanding through Hugo.

Indeed. Now that I'm no longer afraid, I do seek other sources.

[godfry n. glad]

That's an ad hominem though, godfry. Even if Hugo were the biggest cock east of the Mississippi he could still write outstanding introductions to philosophy. I don't know much of anything about my favorite authors; their putative character flaws aren't factors in my appreciation of their work.

The fact remains that I had avoided what I thought was philosophy all of my life, not even realizing that the politics and art, logic and religion I was fascinated by were all philosophy. Hugo's series deftly removed my long-standing fear that I was simply not capable of understanding abstract concepts and gave me a whole new insight into topics I loved and ones I barely knew existed.

Proving that parishioners can learn from the pederast priest, as well. But I have problems with those that claim they love wisdom and act as lapdogs to petty moralist censors. I'd say they just love the sound of their own voice and act to drown out those with whom they disagree.

Indeed. Now that I'm no longer afraid, I do seek other sources.

Well, that's heartening. Now you can leave Hugo behind for good. All for the better.

godfry

[livius drusus]

Proving that parishioners can learn from the pederast priest, as well.

Ugh. That's an unfair and distasteful analogy.

But I have problems with those that claim they love wisdom and act as lapdogs to petty moralist censors. I'd say they just love the sound of their own voice and act to drown out those with whom they disagree.

Perhaps they do, but that doesn't necessarily reduce the value I draw from their work. Danny Kaye was mean to me in the TWA club of Kennedy Airport when I was 8; I still laugh out loud at his goofy costume comedies.

[HelenM]

As for the Holbling introductory pieces, I don't bother. I don't trust the author and he has lost any credibility he might have had with me by his actions. With me, actions speak louder than words. I don't think his work should be lionized here or anywhere else. I think you all should seek other sources for your understanding of philosophical ideas, rather than filtering your understanding through Hugo.

godfry

It wouldn't be very freethinking of me not to read something just because someone has issues with the author.

Not only that but I probably wouldn't get to read anything worth reading any more if I limited my reading to authors with whom no-one has a problem.

Helen

[godfry n. glad]

You're right. My comments were rude, rash and uncalled for.

I offer my apologies to all, including and especially Hugo. His work is excellent. We just have disagreements about freedom of speech.

So be it.

I need to retire from these boards for a while. Or...back off, at least.

One year next week. One year since her death. I'm edgy and melancholy.

I'm sorry.

godfry

[HelenM]

You're right. My comments were rude, rash and uncalled for.

I offer my apologies to all, including and especially Hugo. His work is excellent. We just have disagreements about freedom of speech.

So be it.

I need to retire from these boards for a while. Or...back off, at least.

One year next week. One year since her death. I'm edgy and melancholy.

I'm sorry.

godfry

Anniversaries like that are hard - especially the first one. I'm sorry :(

Helen

[livius drusus]

Oh godfry, I'm so sorry. Please take care of yourself.

[Götterdämmerung]

Following up Livius' point: A long time ago I enjoyed Orson Scott Card's books quite tremendously, until i read one of his interviews. Since it was the first time i ever heard/read him in a conversational mode, it was in shock. Card, in person, seemed the very opposite of the person i imagined to be the author of such fine books. :doh:

[JoeP]

Hi Götterdämmerung! Expand on your perceptions of Orson Scott Card. I thought I'd enjoyed Speaker for the Dead but then read Children of the Mind and got an uncomfortable feeling he was milking a dead horse. There is a strain of idealism in there (at some level ... and I might be just imagining it) that jarred.

[Tom Morris]

Looks pretty interesting. I'll wander through them when I'm a little less sleepy.

[Hugo Holbling]

I added two more.

[viscousmemories]

I added two more.
Guess I'll have to put more paper in the printer. I just printed the whole series last night (thinking perhaps giving it an honored place near the toilet might promote the possibility that I'll get through it all) and the stack is about an inch thick. Are you planning to publish it in book form eventually?

[Hugo Holbling]

Are you planning to publish it in book form eventually?

Should i? At present i have no such plans. It's only written to try to help people.

[viscousmemories]

Should i? At present i have no such plans. It's only written to try to help people.
In my opinion you should. It's a very accessible collection of essays.

[copiae]

I second that opinion. They are eloquently written primers for a fascinating subject.

I havent read the two new ones yet, but I look forward to it.

[Hugo Holbling]

I added two new pieces and am working on a third currently. One is a second look at epistemology, considering the problem of skepticism in particular, while the other is a guide to rhetoric. Hopefully they will be helpful. Several universities are now using the series, so it seems to be going well. You can find them all here (http://www.galilean-library.org/philosophy.html).

[Clutch Munny]

More fine work, Hugo. The new Rhetoric entry in particular is outstanding. It was thought-provoking and a pleasure to read indeed.

Or was that, it was indeed thought-provoking and a pleasure to read? :)

[D. Scarlatti]

Agreed, it's an excellent series, and a service to all mankind.

I'd like to see more Larry Laudan. Anybody that can dismantle The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in the space of a few paragraphs kicks philosophy ass.

[viscousmemories]

The new Rhetoric entry in particular is outstanding. It was thought-provoking and a pleasure to read indeed.
I agree, although I wouldn't have seen it if Clutch hadn't mentioned it here. I had to bypass the cache by using ctrl-F5 to reload the Philosophy manuscripts index page in Firefox before the Rhetoric and Epistemology 2 entries showed up on the list.

[Clutch Munny]

The new Rhetoric entry in particular is outstanding.
I agree, although I wouldn't have seen it if Clutch hadn't mentioned it here.

Eh?

I added two new pieces... One is a second look at epistemology... while the other is a guide to rhetoric.

:wave:

[viscousmemories]

:doh:

[Hugo Holbling]

Thanks for the kind words. I don't have much good to say about Laudan, alas, but I suppose I should try sometime.

[D. Scarlatti]

Criticism might be even better.

[Chatter]

While others have complained about it, I loved the familiar style in the essays.

I have also enjoyed trailing the archives of internet forums (iidb, philosophyforums, ebla, etc...) to find posts by Hugo. The discussions he has been involved in are a great resource in themselves.

But what I can never understand about Hugo is his refusal to capitialise the word I in a sentence. His grammar is otherwise impeccable, leaving me thinking that there most be some postmodernist logic to this systematic abuse of the English language. Hugo, explain thyself!

[seebs]

I think they would make an excellent book.

[Hugo Holbling]

While others have complained about it, I loved the familiar style in the essays.

I didn't know people were complaining (well, with one obvious exception).

The discussions he has been involved in are a great resource in themselves.

Maybe. Sometimes i was bullying people who bullied others and was misunderstood myself for so doing, though. Now i wonder if i should've left well alone.

But what I can never understand about Hugo is his refusal to capitialise the word I in a sentence.

I capitalise it at the start of a sentence (see?), because i'm reaching for the shift key by habit; otherwise i'm typing too fast to get there. There's no deep and extremely meaningful reason for it, alas.

Thanks for the kind words.

[Chatter]

I didn't know people were complaining (well, with one obvious exception).It was only one person, but most of what gave was praise.

[Pendaric]

Hugo, have you ever considered POD publishing?

More info here (http://www.lulu.com/help/node/view/1713#vanity)

There are other outlets that do it as well.

Never done it myself, but if you have any desire to see your work in print this is the easiest way without having to go through publishers and the like.

[Hugo Holbling]

I haven't, but thanks for the suggestion. I should look into it, i suppose, but frankly the idea of taking myself seriously enough to publish anything makes me feel ill. :(

[TheBeast]

I haven't, but thanks for the suggestion. I should look into it, i suppose, but frankly the idea of taking myself seriously enough to publish anything makes me feel ill. :(

Hugo, if ever you are made to feel ill by the thought of publishing your own work, just remember Robbie Williams and Victoria Beckham (unt cunt and unt runt) have published books

[Shake]

Agreed, it's an excellent series, and a service to all mankind.

I'd like to see more Larry Laudan. Anybody that can dismantle The Structure of Scientific Revolutions in the space of a few paragraphs kicks philosophy ass.
I'll have to check that out, as I remember enjoying Kuhn. Of course, that was over a decade ago.

[D. Scarlatti]

I'll have to check that out, as I remember enjoying Kuhn. Of course, that was over a decade ago.

I have a copy of the article here somewhere. I'll dig it out and give the citation after I get back from Target.

Hugo, when can we expect the philosophy of law installment(s)?

[Hugo Holbling]

Hugo, when can we expect the philosophy of law installment(s)?

Soon enough, i guess. I've been working on a few other projects as well as doing more important things (chasing girls, playing rugby and surfing, that is, although not at the same time) and the law piece will probably come after the philosophy of biology one anyway. In the meantime, i just completed an interview (http://galilean-library.org/lessl.html) you might find interesting.

[D. Scarlatti]

In that case I shall wait patiently whilst you violate a few rugby-playing females on your surfboard (come on, you can do it).

And thanks for the latest addition.