Philosophy major?

[Andrew P.C.]

I am taking classes in philosphy. I've been thinking whether i want to do a major in history or philosophy. I'm leaning towards philosophy. My only concern is that I want to understand the arguments from guys such as Kant, Des Carte, etc... I would love to get more books, articles, etc, to understand these things... Any suggestions?

 

[Grymir]

Hi Andrew. I don't have a degree in philosophy, but I have taken a few college classes. It's also what i enjoy to read and study on my own. R.C. Sproul has a great history of philosophy series that makes a great overview to get aquainted with the major themes. He does a great job with the moderns that you mentioned. Then I would start with the oldest ones and work up to the moderns. Don't waste you time reading books about philosophy, read the books written by kant, descarte, PLATO, aristotle, augustine (the city of God is a great commentary on the philosophies of the day, and that's what turned me on to the study of philosophy). When I was in college, my philosophy teacher was as far to the left as I was the right. He helped me so much. (we would gang up on the moderates. He hated middle of the road people, which were most of his students). I do teach philosophy at my local church, so I'm not a rank amatuer. I have read most of the stuff. College would focus mostly on the moderns. They don't know squat. but I would go with a philosophy major if I could.

 

[B.J.]

Andrew,
I would suggest spending a few extra bucks and investing in the History of Western Philosophy lecture series by Dr. Greg Bahnsen. I gained wonderful insight on the philosophers position as well as problems with their approaches to metaphysics, ethics, and epistemology. In my case, I was not offered any critiqes of these thinkers, rather I was left "hanging in the wind" by my professors as if there is nothing else to say about thier schools of thought. Even if you find Bahnsen's criticisms unhelpful, which I doubt, you can at least be aware that the thinker you are studing does have problems within his phiolosophy and your inquirer should not stop with the professors lecture.

 

[FenderPriest]

Andrew,
To piggy back on B.J. suggestion, Dr. John Frame's lectures on the history of philosophy can be downloaded for free by going to the RTS website, and following their link to iTunes. His lectures are very helpful. He's particularly helpful on the last half of the class where he deals fairly thoroughly in my estimation, with the last 300 years or so of philosophical development. It's very helpful also in how he makes the connections between philosophers and the liberal theologians, how, for example, Kant influenced Barth.

Anyhow, I am/was a philosophy major. I graduated this past May with a double major in Philosophy and English. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and think everybody should do it. Being a philosophy major is more than just learning what other people thought. It is both A) learning how to critically think, and B) learning how to live. I absolutely love the head of my philosophy department. He's an amazing, brilliant man (as well as being a Christian - though, not Reformed). Philosophy equips you on how to live life. It's not really an issue of getting a job when you're done - that will come in the Lord's kind providence. Philosophy will help train your mind to be a tool for the kingdom of Christ and the advancement of his gospel in an age of sloppy thinking. As a side note, I'm a computer tech now - nothing to do with my degree - but my degree, through God's grace, has opened the doors to many witnessing and apologetic encounters with folks at work.

Anyhow, love knowledge my friend, don't just learn it.
~Jacob

 

[Davidius]

From what I understand, most of philosophy can be boiled down to the differences between Plato and Aristotle. Read as much as you can from them in order to build a solid foundation.

 

[CatechumenPatrick]

I strongly recommend doing a philosophy major or minor no matter what you want to do after college (just don’t expect to get a job with it). One of my majors is philosophy and I will be starting graduate work in philosophy next fall before I go to seminary. Greg Bahnsen’s lectures (and Frame’s, free on RTS) are both great audio resources regardless of what major you decide on. If you are interested in contemporary philosophy from Christian perspectives, Van Til, Gordon Clark, and Alvin Plantinga are great places to start. Clark’s volume on the history of philosophy is decent and from a Reformed viewpoint. Also, Bavinck's Dogmatics are extremely helpful in aquiring a solid grasp not only on the Reformed theological worldview, but in Reformed philosophy and its relation to non-Christian philosophy as well.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Besides the original texts, I would recommend reading Copleston's history of philosophy, and as many Cambridge Companion books as you can get your hands on. Check your school library to see how many they have (of the Cambridge Companion texts). That is what I am doing, and it is working out very well.

 

[Zenas]

Don't waste your money on those mickey mouse degrees. Those teachers won't teach you anything but their own god-hating skepticism. I can barely remember a single thing I learned in my philosophy classes, but I remember the professor's straw-man arguments against Christianity, having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Teach yourself philosophy, you'll get a better education and it's much cheaper.

 

[CatechumenPatrick]

Don't waste your money on those mickey mouse degrees. Those teachers won't teach you anything but their own god-hating skepticism. I can barely remember a single thing I learned in my philosophy classes, but I remember the professor's straw-man arguments against Christianity, having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Teach yourself philosophy, you'll get a better education and it's much cheaper.

Yes, most professors today are open in their enmity toward Christ and biblical Christianity and most have few, if any, challenging arguments, yet that does not mean their courses are as useless as you seem to be saying. The Egyptians can be profitably plundered, as it is sometimes said. Unless you have an exceptional, quick mind, "teaching yourself" is near impossible when it comes to complicated philosophers (like Quine, Kant, Hegel, et al)--at least for me. Also, there is no better place to be exposed to non-Christian or anti-Christian worldviews than in secular philosophy courses, especially in upper-level and graduate level classes. The "wisdom" and (deceptive) thought of the world should not underestimated, no matter how poor many undergraduate courses and professors are.

 

[Brian Bosse]

Hello Gentlemen,

My only concern is that I want to understand the arguments from guys such as Kant, Des Carte, etc... I would love to get more books, articles, etc, to understand these things... Any suggestions?

Being a philosophy major is more than just learning what other people thought. It is both A) learning how to critically think, and B) learning how to live...Philosophy will help train your mind to be a tool for the kingdom of Christ and the advancement of his gospel in an age of sloppy thinking.

This is the best thing said in this thread so far. A study in philosophy (the hand maiden to theology) will help you understand how to live your life in accordance with the Christian worldview. It will help you take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. It will help you be able to critically analyze presuppositions to see if they comport with the Christian worldview. It will aid you in understanding the plight of the non-Christian and how you might approach this person in an apologetic encounter. It will clarify the futility of autonomous man. Philosophy is the history of one massive train wreck after another in terms of trying to create a structure able to make sense of the world. It points to the only answer - the God of the Bible. It makes explicit the antithesis between the secular and Christian. I could go on and on.

Here are some things I find unhelpful in this thread...

Don't waste you time reading books about philosophy, read the books written by kant, descarte, PLATO, aristotle, augustine...College would focus mostly on the moderns. They don't know squat.

I agree that reading the original sources is important. I disagree that it is a waist of time to read books about philosophy. If reading about philosophy is a waist, then going to a lecture to listen to someone talk about philosophy is waist. Also, it is important to understand "moderns." Most of the thinking today in the West is characterized by this mind-set. If you do not understand the concerns and the thinking, then you will be ineffective in communcating with these people.

In some sense, all non-Christian thinkers can be said to "not know squat." This is not to insult their mental prowess, but rather to express the futility of autonomous thinking. So, I would say that Plato was a genius in one sense, but the Bible would call him a fool in another sense.

Don't waste your money on those mickey mouse degrees. Those teachers won't teach you anything but their own god-hating skepticism. I can barely remember a single thing I learned in my philosophy classes, but I remember the professor's straw-man arguments against Christianity, having nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Zenas fails to see the benefit of understanding "the enemy" - so to speak. He also fails to see how such skepticism and "straw-man arguments" can help sharpen critical thinking skills and reinforce faith as a result. It also helps the person who understands these things to help others who may not be as adept at navigating the waters of secular thought.

Here are some other comments that are helpful...

I would suggest spending a few extra bucks and investing in the History of Western Philosophy lecture series by Dr. Greg Bahnsen.

Two thoughts regarding this. First off, the sound quality in the early lectures is terrible, and over all the sound quality of the series is not great. Secondly, I find guys like Bahnsen and Clark to be so Christ-ocentric in their philosophical approach that their teaching regarding the history of philosophy is absolutely terrific. I thoroughly enjoy listening to Bahnsen talk about philosophy. He always brings it back to the Christian worldview. He is so concerned to take every tought captive to the obedience of Christ. Even if he is not as sharp in some areas as others (who is?), his Christo-centric methodology is to be emulated. Sproul, Frame, Van Til, Gordon Clark and Alvin Plantinga are all to be recommended.

Besides the original texts, I would recommend reading Copleston's history of philosophy, and as many Cambridge Companion books as you can get your hands on.

Coplestone's History of Philosophy is considered the best. What I appreciate about him is that he makes explicit his Thomism (he is Roman Catholic). As such, the reader is prepared to understand the filter Coplestone is using. He is also very thorough. This is not a quick or light read. I recommend it, but for an introduction someone might want to start elsewhere. Clark's book would fit this bill nicely.

As far as the Cambridge texts go, I own two that are fabulous: one on epistemolgy, and the other on Godel's Theorems. I cannot comment on the rest; however, the one on epistemology is the best introduction I have come across and is highly recommended. The one on Godel's Theorem is for those who have some background in mathematical logic - and as such is somewhat specialized.

I hope this has been helpful, and I hope my criticisms are taken in the light of me trying to be helful and not hurtful.

Sincerely,

Brian

 

[greenbaggins]

My opinion is this: get Copleston, get the Encylopedia of Philosophy published by Collier/MacMillan, learn Greek and Latin, and spend the majority of your time in the primary sources, using the above two mentioned works (Clark is an excellent resource for the big picture, as is Donal Palmer's little gem _Looking at Philosophy_, which is an introduction to philosophy by use of cartoons) as references and introductions to the thinkers you want to study.

 

[Zenas]

Brian,

I do not fail to see the utility in understanding the enemy. You grossly misunderstand me if you think I am for isolating ourselves to the world rather than innoculating. I think there are better ways to do it that do not involve wasting time and money on philosophy classes.

 

[RamistThomist]

Mr Bosse,
If you get the mp3 version of Bahnsen's lectures, the quality is a lot better.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Zena, I am a philosophy major (technically not on paper), but in my experience my professors mainly want the students to understand the views of the original thinkers. Although you may have had a bad experience with a philosophy professor in college, most I have talked with are not like that. In fact, in my experience, most straw man arguments against Christianity have come from non-philosophy professors. My history professor uses some pretty bad ones.

You also haven’t explained why it would be wasting one’s time and money to take philosophy classes.

 

[Andrew P.C.]

What about Col 2:8?

(Col 2:8) See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

People have also told me that the bible says not to go into "vain philosophy". I haven't seen anything of the such.

Any thoughts?

 

[Vytautas]

What about Col 2:8?

(Col 2:8) See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

People have also told me that the bible says not to go into "vain philosophy". I haven't seen anything of the such.

Any thoughts?

There is a difference between being taking advataged by unbelieving thought, and studying unbelief for the right reasons. The first is being passive and thinking the unbeliever has the correct interpretation of reality if they are presuasive, and the other recongnizes that we study unbelief to speak their language and to engage with them. The unbeliever might have the correct understading of an aspect of reality, but the reason is that he has the common image of God as we do, and has the ability to understand the world around him.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

What about Col 2:8?

Here is Greg Bahnsen's answer: PA053

 

[cih1355]

What about Col 2:8?

(Col 2:8) See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.

People have also told me that the bible says not to go into "vain philosophy". I haven't seen anything of the such.

Any thoughts?

There is a difference between being taking advataged by unbelieving thought, and studying unbelief for the right reasons. The first is being passive and thinking the unbeliever has the correct interpretation of reality if they are presuasive, and the other recongnizes that we study unbelief to speak their language and to engage with them. The unbeliever might have the correct understading of an aspect of reality, but the reason is that he has the common image of God as we do, and has the ability to understand the world around him.

What would be another reason to study unbelief besides being able to speak their language and to engage with them? What is the importance for knowing about different philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and so on?

 

[FenderPriest]

What would be another reason to study unbelief besides being able to speak their language and to engage with them? What is the importance for knowing about different philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and so on?

The reason you want to study these guys is because they have a profound influence on how the modern, everyday man thinks. For example, without getting into the full story, Kant had a profound influence on how we view the world. In philosophy (for the most part) prior to him, people thought that there were properties within an object, and properties that we ascribed to an object. So, for example, an object might have form and texture inherent to it, but you ascribe color and smell. Kant says, "No way!" Kant comes in and says, "No, everything you see is an interpretive grid that you apply to the world." That is, essentially everything is a blank slate until you come in and apply your grid of order to it, giving color, texture, meaning, etc. to an object. Now, he has a much fuller and extensive reason behind this that we should understand because it influences how we think. How does his influence come around in normal life today? Have you ever heard somebody say, "It's all a matter of interpretation?" This may have existed before Kant, but he sure gave it a big, reasoned out push into the modern mind that has trickled down into the "Average Joe's" way of thinking because it's in the media, news paper, books, tv shows, and pulpit that he listens to. Most people have never heard of Kant, but it's important to read him because if you know how the mother ship operates, you have a better understanding of where to poke holes, and a better appreciation for the system of Christian thinking from the Revelation of God.

There's more to say on this, particularly Plato's Cave, and forms, to Kant's Categorical Imperative, but the above example is all I can provide at the moment.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

FenderPriest, I'm pretty sure Kant wouldn't be happy if he heard someone say, "It's all a matter of interpretation?", if that is meant to imply some sort of relativism. For Kant, the categories apply to all rational creatures, so we have the same interpretative grid. I agree with your main point though, that philosophers have a profound influence on the way people think. In fact, I think a good reason to study philosophy is to not get duped into believing in a false philosophy.

 

[FenderPriest]

FenderPriest, I'm pretty sure Kant wouldn't be happy if he heard someone say, "It's all a matter of interpretation?", if that is meant to imply some sort of relativism. For Kant, the categories apply to all rational creatures, so we have the same interpretative grid. I agree with your main point though, that philosophers have a profound influence on the way people think. In fact, I think a good reason to study philosophy is to not get duped into believing in a false philosophy.

Oh quite true. I didn't mean to imply that Kant would approve of the relativist sentiment. However, his metaphysical cap on metaphysics (as strange as it is) does seem to lead in that direction, while not actually going there. Like many things, the actual idea is quite different than the popular idea from it. Sort of like Don McLean and Madonna - sure they sang the same song, and it had similar notes and stuff, but that's about it.

 

[cih1355]

What are some of the most important philosophical works in the history of western philosophy? I would like to start reading those works.

 

[BrianLanier]

What would be another reason to study unbelief besides being able to speak their language and to engage with them? What is the importance for knowing about different philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, and so on?

A VERY helpful bit by Michael Sudduth on the usefulness of Philosophy for Theology:

On the Usefulness of Philosophy for Christian Theology

Good stuff.