How to Read Literature Like A Philosopher

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 13 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 17

  • @SunnyWilliamsLA
    @SunnyWilliamsLA 22 години тому +8

    As a philosopher, I would argue that philosophy is not about Truth, but about, indeed, thinking itself. Granted, I am anti-Cartesian and don't think we need certainty. Embracing doubt leads to the kind of questioning that IS philosophy. In that way, it can be about truth (with a lower case t) for the subjective individual, but it's more about the process of thinking and questioning that gets us somewhere, but sometimes, gets us nowhere!

    • @bokramubokramu8834
      @bokramubokramu8834 8 годин тому +2

      What makes you a philosopher?

    • @SunnyWilliamsLA
      @SunnyWilliamsLA 2 години тому

      @ A PhD in Philosophy! But I'm of the mind that anyone can be a philosopher; I tell my students it's just about asking questions.

  • @WhiteChocolate74
    @WhiteChocolate74 13 хвилин тому

    I have nothing to say but i love your channel!

  • @bart-v
    @bart-v День тому +8

    French philosophy has always been very close to literature (not just Rousseau, but Diderot, Sartre, Camus and many others) and French literature has always been very close to philosophy.

  • @Ldlax40
    @Ldlax40 5 годин тому

    I find great literature has a complementary adversarial relationship with philosophy. I always felt I did not have an appreciation of Nietzsche until reading Dostoyevsky.

  • @TheBookedEscapePlan
    @TheBookedEscapePlan 12 годин тому

    It is very odd you posted this today. I wrote a blog post recently on sort of the same subject. The first half is on my personal growth as a reader. The 2nd is more about the historical development of literary criticism. I'm literally taking a break from typing up the 2nd part from my notebook as we speak; the first part I typed up and posted yesterday after writing it that morning. Isn't that a really weird coincidence?
    The subject of the first half - the one that's posted - is that I've personally grown from being someone who was mostly fascinated with formal and compositional aspects of literary works, particularly fiction, to being, these days, someone who wants to understand what ideas some of the great novels - not merely the subset of the upper-case "Great Novels," but the larger set of lower-case great novels which includes the subset of Great Novels as one of its elements - are wrestling with in terms of ideas, big and small, and the literary techniques with which they employ in order to explore them.
    By the way, you're the only fellow Austen fan I've met whose favorite Austen novel is Emma. However, I think every great novelist must be of a philosophical turn-of-mind. I have no disagreements about Austen being among the best, but it doesn't make any sense for a novelist to be both great while lacking philosophical interests. That makes as much sense as calling a great novel unartful. Both are impossible, because exploring seriously interesting ideas in an artful way is precisely the base-criteria for being a great novel.
    Great literature may lack the precision which academic philosophy aims for, but it revels in raw, deep, serious, thoughtful philosophical interests and ideas in a way that must remain rigorous, but also open and elusive in order to be worthwhile philosophy of its own variety.
    There's also the matter of literary criticism, which disproves that literature and philosophy don't mix since literary criticism is merely philosophy applied to a particular literary work, literature in general, or sets in between.
    I suppose that literature need not be philosophical in its motivations, and that is the confusing part about all of this. But even a great novel which may not necessarily seem philosophical on its surface - Bleak House for instance (I think you've read that one) but it does put on a brilliant display of humanity, and it does probe the sickness which legal bureaucracy wreaks upon a particular family's already tenuous bonding, and so there must be a philosophical undertow of some sort (I hope we're both treating the word "philosophy the same, it occurs to me to state; on its face-value: a love of knowledge) in order to have any artistic interpretation of one's deep observations about humanity and critiques of some of the systems which result - symptomatic systems, if you'll allow.

  • @bokramubokramu8834
    @bokramubokramu8834 8 годин тому +2

    Cool video but the questions you presented are just basic literary analysis questions that are taught in any lit 101 course. Just saying. Anyway, good video keep up the good work!

  • @bakmanthetitan
    @bakmanthetitan День тому +1

    I simply contest the assumption that philisophy brings us closer to truth - or at least that literature doesn't. Philosophy can more precisely specify objects of study, and can make assertions about them, which themselves become objects of study. Philisophy produces *facts* about systems-under-study through particular perspectives, which is *exactly* what literature does, but it doesn't produce *truth*. Did Aristotle or Dostoyevsky bring us nearer to a prescriptive ethical framework? Neither did, but both produced tools for thinking about moral questions. If you worry that you like literature because you "just like thinking", I would suggest that a philosopher should be doubly worried.

    • @bakmanthetitan
      @bakmanthetitan День тому

      In fact, if I were to make a concrete assessment of the moral of Crime and Punishment, I would call it a polemic against the suggestion that *there is any truth or untruth* to Raskolnikov's essay. The ending of that book is radically "unsatisfying" precisely because any satisfying resolution would be a lie. The existence of "great men" does not, and could never concern social reality. The worlds in which Raskolnikov is and isn't such a man are equally figments, equally products of perspective and imagination. It is perhaps appropriate that Raskolnikov discovers the "truth" of the situation in the Bible, which (IIUC) Dostoyevsky questions elsewhere; neither fiction nor religion is any more fictional than philosophy.

  • @NWong
    @NWong 9 годин тому

    Ironic thing is that Plato was the greatest sophist and poet of them all and that was what he was condemned for - corrupting the youth of athens with his reason no less.
    For me, the conclusion is something similar to Wittgenstein where poetry and philosophy operate on a spectrum. There are some truths and some people whom need to be shown not told. And there’s a movement of the mind one must make or a lie that must be confronted first before the truth can take root.

  • @estuchedepeluche2212
    @estuchedepeluche2212 16 годин тому

    Clarity you say? Tell that to Derrida and Foucault?

  • @اللهمَصلِعلىمحمدٍوَآلِمحمد-ك1ج

    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    قالَ الرسول الأَكرم مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) :
    { ذِكرُ اللّٰهِ عز وجل عِبادة ، وذِكري عِبادة ، وذِكرُ عليٍ عِبادة ، وذِكرُ الأئمةِ من ولدهِ عِبادة }
    صدقَ رسولُنا مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    قال الرسول الأَكرم مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وآلهِ وسلم ) :
    { عليٌ معَ الحق والحقُ معَ علي }
    صدقَ رسولُنا مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وآلهِ وسلم ) 💛
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    قال النبي مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) :
    { يا علي لا يُحبكَ إلا مُؤمنٌ ولا يُبغضكَ إلا مُنافقٌ }
    صدقَ رسولُنا مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    قال النبي مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) :
    { حُسَيْنٌ مِنِّي وَأَنَا مِنْ حُسَيْنٍ
    أَحَبَّ اللّٰهُ مَنْ أَحَبَّ حُسَيْنَا
    حُسَيْنٌ سِبْطٌ مِنْ الْأَسْبَاطِ }
    صدقَ رسولُنا مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وَآلهِ وسلم ) 💛
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    قال النبي مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وآلهِ وسلم ) :
    { أحبكم إلى اللّٰه أحسنكم أخلاقاً }
    صدقَ رسولُنا مُحمد ( صلى اللّٰهُ عليهِ وآلهِ وسلم ) 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    🕋🕋🕋🕋
    أشهدُ🌹أنْ🌹لا إلهَ🌹إلا ﷲ وَحدهُ🌹لا شَريكَ🌹له
    🕋🕋🕋🕋
    وأشهدُ🌹أنّ🌹مُحمداً🌹رسولُ🌹ﷲ
    🕋🕋🕋🕋
    وأشهدُ🌹أنّ🌹علياً🌹وليُ🌹ﷲ
    🕋🕋🕋🕋
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    1⃣ تَسبيح مولاتي فاطمة الزهراء (ع) :
    🕋
    ﷲُ أكبر (34)
    الحَمدُ للّٰه (33)
    سُبحانَ ﷲ (33)
    🕋
    2⃣ لا إلهَ إلا اللّٰه
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    السلامُ على الحسين
    وعلى عليِ بن الحسين
    وعلى أولادِ الحسين
    وعلى أصحابِ الحسين
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    اللهمَ ثبتنا على ولاية إمام المُتقين
    ووصي الرسول الأَكرم و أمير المؤمنين
    وأبا الحسنين الإِمام علي بن أبي طالب (عليهِ السلام)
    بِحقِ مولانا محمدٍ وَآلِ محمد
    الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين 💛
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    اللهمَ صلِ على مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمد 🤍
    اللهمَ عَجلْ لوليكَ الفرج في عافيةٍ مِنا يا اللّٰه 🤍
    أستَغفرُ اللّٰهَ ربي وأتوبُ إلَيه 🤍
    الحمدُ للّٰهِ ربِّ العالمين 🤍
    سُبحانَ اللّٰهِ وبِحمدهِ سُبحانَ اللّٰهِ العظيم 🤍
    اللّٰهُ أكبر 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    ‏✨ بِسْمِ ﷲِ الّذِي لا يَضُرُ معَ إسْمِهِ شَيْءٌ
    في الْأَرْضِ ولا في السّمَاءِ وَهُوَ السّمِيعُ الْعَلِيم ✨
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    ‏اللهمَ ارزُق كُلَ مُحتاجٍ و أهدي كُلَ ضالٍ و أغفِر خطايانا و الذنوب و شَافي و عافي كُلَ مَريضٍ بِحقِ مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمدٍ الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين 💛
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    اللهمَ احشُرنا معَ مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمدٍ ، وارزقنا شفاعتهم في يوم القيامة بِحقِ مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمدٍ الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين إنكَ سميعٌ مُجيب 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    اللهمَ صلِ وسلم وزد وبارك وتَرحم وتَحنن
    على مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمدٍ الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين 💛
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
    اللهمَ صلِ على مولانا مُحمدٍ وَآلِ مُحمدٍ
    الطيبين الطاهرين المعصومين
    وَصحبِهِ المُنتجبين 🤍
    ➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖❤

  • @willieluncheonette5843
    @willieluncheonette5843 13 годин тому

    you don't wanna do that

  • @Strawberry-fk6iw
    @Strawberry-fk6iw 18 годин тому +1

    Read literature like a reader. Like a human being.