Few Links

Do you read philosophy texts all the way through?  Over at Maverick Philosopher, there is interesting post and comments on this. I’m not the one that easily reads the books through, and even when I get back to them, I usually start all over again, and surprise, surprise, I stop again before going through all the text. I have read Transcendental Aesthetics several times, Analytic of Concepts once or twice probably, but what is “The Schematism of The Pure Concepts of Understanding” about? (Those are parts of the Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, the Schematism starts from page 176).

Let me connect this with the information that on the Mead project site you can find Henri Bergson’s Matter and Memory. I started reading it few weeks ago, but didn’t read it through, though I found it very interesting. I plan to return to it in future, though the next time I intend to use diigo to highlight and annotate parts of the html, so that it will make it easier to stop/return to the book. I wrote about diigo few months ago when it was beta, but the service seems better those days. Mead project hosts also html versions of Bergson’s Time and Free Will and Creative Evolution, along with lot more works from psychology, sociology and philosophy from the turn of the century)

And here are few more links, which are not all philosophy connected but might be interesting: A blog that collects all kind of strange and rare maps, FaceResearch.org featuring different studies on the attractiveness of faces and voices and examples of transformation of faces using computer technology, three cool color “illusions” and a timeline of Enlightenment philosophy.

2 thoughts on “Few Links

  1. Tanasije,

    This is an interesting question to raise because those of us interested in philosophy tend to be bibliophiles. I like to boast of having read Kant’s First Critique all the way through, but I’ve not read any of Hume’s works all the way through.

    With respect to work on my dissertation, I’ve not read anyone’s work all the way through. This could get me in big trouble. E.g., I’ve read chapter 1 and 2 of Goldman’s _A Theory of Human Action_ very thoroughly, but I’ve not read a later chapter on the Behavioral Sciences in Action Theory. That might get me in trouble b/c I’m applying social scientific methodology to a problem in action theory.

    I agree with ggw that it’s a bad habit not to read things all the way through. Maybe, I’ll be able to rid myself of that bad habit!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s