Spent a great day off work with a visit to 大山堂書店 (Taizando Shoten), one of my favorite philosophy bookstores.
It's a bit of a misleading title; it's a collection of essays that spans the study of Pythagoras from various perspectives, including different times, and thus can be considered a "history".
Regardless, it looks to be a solid reference for understanding key Pythagorean terms, as well as key players who helped form his legend and wide appeal.
Many only consider Pythagoras as the mathematician who, you know, figured out the thing with the triangles and its sides.
To the contrary, he had a profound impact on the study of metaphysics and mysticism as well - Plato being one of his benefactors.
To understand Platonist/late Platonist thought, it was essential to have a strong grasp on pre-Socratic, specifically Pythagorean ideas. Hoping this can help me get closer to this.
A hopefully fun and engaging way for me to try to learn Attic Greek.
To be honest if I can even just learn the alphabet, so that I can read and pronounce key terms, that would be more than enough for me at the moment.
A bit of a controversial pick-up for me.
Ryle, as well as his disciple Dennett[1] (who wrote the foreword to this book), controversially believed in short that they do not believe human consciousness exists.
I don't think I agree with Ryle and Dennett, and I don't think I will be convinced after I've read this book. Yet I felt it important to read regardless; the reason being, it seems modern conceptions of what "mind" and "consciousness" are closely tied to the ideas discussed in this book.
I can't remember where I read it[2], but there was an idea that stuck with me regarding philosophy: that philosophers themselves do not shape the ideas and notions that people in the same timeframe adhere to. Rather it is the opposite - philosophers and their purported ideas are a result of the already widely conceived notions of the time.
Therefore, I'm hoping that by reading Ryle, I can have a better understanding of a "current consensus" of what mind and consciousness are.
I think one of the skills I have been only semi-consciously working on, yet has been valuable, is the ability to critically read things I know I may disagree with.
It means actively processing why I deem certain things as "wrong" or "incorrect", without simply attributing it to something some other book reviewer, or popular voice online, said.
It's obviously more difficult than my usual reading, but I feel like if I can't do that, I don't deserve to say blanket statements like "this person is wrong" and move on. And who knows, maybe these books actually make good points. I will never know until I give them a fair chance.
I feel like this is the good thing about reading - or at least, reading in pursuit of my personal Truth. I don't think there are any sides to this. You don't do yourself any good service by adamantly sticking to one side of the argument.[3]
I have been reading his book Consciousness Explained (though currently on hold with not much of a dent made). ↩︎
Maybe Graeber's The Dawn of Everything? ↩︎
I think this is also one of the reasons why I was interested in Platonic theology/metaphysics, rather than just jumping straight into learning more deeply about the Abrahamic religions. When doing so - and I feel like this is especially the case with Christian "theology" - it's more about sticking to a side, and winning a position, than it is about looking for the truth. ↩︎