The primary texts, i.e. books written by the philosophers widely studied, can be difficult to read for a variety of reasons. Some, like Hegel and Heidegger, are difficult per se, because they are indeed unclear and populated with words you have never encountered before. They may use words in odd ways that makes them seem as if it was a different language or a poor translation (e.g. Das Man in Heidegger, Absolute Being in Hegel, Ethical in Kierkegaard – the list really is rather endless).
However, even the clearest of writing, such as Isiah Berlin, David Hume, John Stuart Mill or Schopenhauer can still be exhausting to read, once again for a variety of reasons. Some tackle a topic in such exhausting detail, defending their thesis from every angle, that it seems almost pedantic (e.g. John Rawl’s Theory of Justice). Other texts are painful because what they substantiate seem repulsive to our understanding, such as Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan and its support of authoritarianism.
Let me cut to the chase – so how can we read them?
There is a simple trick I was told on my first day at Philosophy School, which was a game-changer for me. READ THE TEXT TWICE. That’s it. I wrote it in caps in case you missed it.
I likewise struggled and still struggle with reading philosophical texts. BUT I have come to realise that they contain a lot, and why should we expect them to be easy? So firstly, make peace with the fact that they may be hard. These are great thinkers, expounding on difficult ideas that still trouble us today, on issues that are complex and hard to grasp. They are trying to think about them in fundamental ways, to get right to the ground of the issue, and so can express views that seem to say in so many words what really can be said in just one sentence. But the reason they do it is because they are trying to argue it thoroughly against possible attacks.
Secondly, language itself might not be able to support what they want to say, which is why they have to invent new words (once again, Heidegger does this a lot, e.g. being-toward-death, Dasein). Be patient, and try to understand what is meant by checking resources such as philosophy encyclopedias (e.g. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Internet Encylopedia of Philosphy, and my favourite, Routledge Encylopedia of Philosophy). Sometimes, there are phrases which are untranslated, often in Latin or perhaps French or German. If you are in the mood, perhaps search on the web for a translation.
However, I suggest you first just try to plough through the text without worrying too much about ideas or words you don’t know. Perhaps as you read, the text becomes clear from the context or from explanations later. Perhaps some words are just marginal or unimportant. But if you see the same word coming up over and over again, you may wish to check it. Do not be afraid to use a dictionary to check words you do not know, not because they express philosophical concepts but simply words you don’t know. Once again, remember, these are great thinkers, they have studied a lot in their fields. Hence, their language abilities likely exceed yours, so checking words in dictionary is not shameful.
In summary: first, just try to make your way through the text. Perhaps not the entire book at once but just one chapter. Then read it again. You would realise, almost magically, that what on first reading seems completely alien and impossible to grasp, is now a bit clearer. Why? Now you understand how the writer writes, his style and the way he structures the sentence.
Some expressions become more familiar; perhaps you have also thought through what was said as you read and so now have developed some understanding. Maybe you found out the meanings of some words you didn’t know, and that helps too.
BUT you may still not understand many things. It is time now to approach secondary resources: perhaps listen to some videos (The Bachelor Recommends has some suggestions of channels), or go to the encyclopedias or read some secondary literature from your library.
This brings me to another important point. Sometimes, when approaching a “difficult” philosopher for the first time, perhaps doing so through introductory texts may be prudent. For instance, before attempting Hegel’s Phenomenology or Kant’s Critiques, you may wish to read an introduction to their thought, or watch some videos on them, so that you get the big ideas. Someone has pre-digested the material for you, which can be good. However, you also want to read the text for yourself, as after all, surely you don’t want always to eat pre-masticated food? (in the words of the immortal Schopenhauer) Instead, let these aids be departure points to help you on your philosophical journey.
Another point: you may also wish to pave your way by first reading simpler primary texts, before tackling for instance the post-modernists like Deleuze or Derrida. I have a list of suggestions here.
What do you think? Naturally there would be some of you, among my readers, who are more “advanced” in your philosophical journey. So perhaps you disagree or have other ideas to contribute. Please do so in the comments section.
As for the rookies, I wrote this for you. I hope it helps. My final word is: don’t be disheartened. Realise you are trying to understand the thoughts of the great, so some humility is in order.
My big suggestion is to read it twice, but sometimes, three or more times is in order, though I would suggest searching out some secondary literature by that point.
Keep going, keep trying, keep thinking, and you’d get there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those who prefer listening, an audio recording of the post can be found here.
No comments:
Post a Comment