What were your undergraduate textbooks?

Reply to Largo
I was assigned to read primary texts. I came to appreciate commentary later on. But I am glad I did not start with that.

What draws you to philosophy?

Beginning Logic, E. J. Lemmon. loved it.
Bertrand Russell, Problems of Philosophy. Very good.
Leibniz, Monadology. Awful.
Locke, awful
Berkeley's essay and dialogues. Very good.
Hume, the moral philosophy one. Very good.
Ethics, V. M Hare ?? Hated it
James, Varieties if Religious Experience. Good.
James, lectures on Pragmatism. OK
Kant, Critique. Never bothered reading it.
Kant, Groundwork of a Metaphysic of Morals. Odd nonsense.
Schopenhauer never bothered reading it.
Kripke, Naming and Necessity. Didn't read it.
Popper, Conjectures and Refutations. OK
Bradley, Appearance and Reality. Very good.
Some Aristotle shite

Papers of note:
Goodman's new riddle of induction. Loved it.
Frege, Sense and Reference. very good


..can't remember the rest

Quoting Paine

?Largo

I was assigned to read primary texts. I came to appreciate commentary later on. But I am glad I did not start with that.

I had the opposite advice in my one (senior level) course back in 1958: Read commentaries first, then primary sources. I had tried to understand a particular philosopher in order to write a report, but flamed out there with little understanding of what he was writing about. The professor then told me to go to commentaries at first - which worked.

Mostly primary texts. No textbooks. After the introduction course we followed a chronological sequence over four years.

Reply to jgill
I guess I was not expected to give a cogent account but to wrestle with the problems without a particular result showing I got it or not.

Reply to Paine Quoting Paine

What draws you to philosophy?

The short answer to your question is this: I want to learn how to think and how to ask smart questions.

I am very good at science, and the answers to the questions in established science are either correct or incorrect, except in frontier science. Many things in life have no simple answers. Most people learn by going through life facing the unknowns.

I talked to an engineer who had a course in philosophy. He said because of that one course, his education did not end after college. Well, it sounds good to me. I like to be among people who love to read and write.

Reply to bert1 Thank you for the list of books and the comments about them.

There are several approaches, "problems of philosophy" which deals with issues in philosophy, history of philosophy, which is a summary of what the philosophers said, and reading the works of the philosophers. Textbooks sometimes combine them, identifying topics, giving an overview, and giving excerpts.

Different approaches appeal to different people, but wherever you start you can follow your interests. Often having a good teacher is the most important thing. But here again, different people have different opinions about what a good teacher is. If you find a teacher who inspires you to continue that is good enough to start.

Good luck.

Quoting Largo

I am very good at science, and the answers to the questions in established science are either correct or incorrect, except in frontier science. Many things in life have no simple answers. Most people learn by going through life facing the unknowns.

I'm a civil engineer. I took two philosophy courses in college, but I can't remember what we read. I recommend the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, probably the Stephen Mitchell translation since it's the most accessible to westerners. It takes two hours or less to read. The Taoist world view has been the most helpful, useful for my work as an engineer. Engineers, and scientists too I guess, are pragmatic. The Tao Te Ching lays out the most scientific, pragmatic metaphysics I've seen. I also loved R.G. Collingwood's "Essay on Metaphysics" and "Philosophy of Art." I think @Jamal is reading "An Essay on The Philosophical Method." Again, as a pragmatic engineer - "Pragmatism" by William James. And "Self Reliance" by Emerson because I love it.

Reply to jgill Thank you

Reply to Fooloso4 Thanks

Reply to T Clark Thanks

Reply to Largo
I have a suggestion. Before you register, go to the actual school bookstore, and they should have all the books for each class grouped together. Read the first five or so pages of the start (not the introduction or the preface) of each book for every class you could take. Focus on which makes you react to it with your own ideas (as in reading you should make note of those first). Sign up for whichever courses have the books that interested you the most. Good luck.

Quoting Largo

What other philosophy books did you read besides the textbooks during your undergraduate studies and why you read them?

I studied Ordinary Language Philosophy, but that would be hard to find a focus on. Most notably, it includes Plato, J.L. Austin, Wittgenstein, and Stanley Cavell (most recently).

I studied Ordinary Language Philosophy

Wow, you must be a linguist.

I have a suggestion. Before you register, go to the actual school bookstore, and they should have all the books for each class grouped together. Read the first five or so pages of the start (not the introduction or the preface) of each book for every class you could take. Focus on which makes you react to it with your own ideas (as in reading you should make note of those first). Sign up for whichever courses have the books that interested you the most. Good luck

What a good idea. Thanks

Reply to Largo

Far too long ago to remember well, really. I recall that we were forced to read Plato's Republic and Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions when Freshmen. I don't know why. I suspect it was believed that if we were willing to read such books, we could be induced to read most anything and believe it to be rewarding in some undefined sense. And so we did.

Reply to Largo

I studied philosophy at university briefly in 1988 (I think). We didn't read books, we were given photocopied extracts to learn. I never read them. I read Henry James instead of William James and Jane Austin instead of J.L Austin. I found philosophy (as an academic subject) insufferably boring and pointless. These days I am interested in what people believe and why.

Reply to Tom Storm I like literature, but Henry James is the worst writer of all times. I won't read his ever again even if I must fail the course.

Reply to Ciceronianus thank you.

Quoting Largo

Henry James is the worst writer of all times

I think The Turn of the Screw is a little masterpiece but he is difficult for modern sensibilities.

The Turn of the Screw is a little masterpiece but he is difficult for modern sensibilities.

You have great patience and sharp mind to be reading it.