Are there any recommended philosophy books? -5
Philosophers must be wise and experienced, with a deep understanding of life and death, rise and fall. They must have drifted among the sea of people and formed strong rational intuitions about the world.
Without this kind of intuition, philosophy is nothing more than a waste of space full of jargon and saintly quotes.
Good philosophers are not just good talkers.
They are also able to accomplish things, unite people, and take care of themselves in work and life. If the purpose of studying philosophy is to govern and serve the world, resolve life’s confusion, then it is better to learn from Mark Twain rather than Kant or Hegel.
I recommend that young people put philosophical works and the history of philosophy in a secondary position.
First, learn the natural sciences and skills well, and drift among the sea of people. Only after you have experienced a lot of life and come back from the brink of death can you talk about philosophy. Only then will you know what you are talking about, and what other philosophers are talking about.
Philosophy involves people’s basic methodological issues and profoundly affects their values, which in turn affects their positions and destinies. In fact, for individuals, it is a practice with extremely strong political attributes. In other words, its essence is not about learning an “objective truth” that individuals must obey, but about embracing a chosen (or being chosen) destiny through a certain ritual that appears to be “learning.”
Philosophy is a process of reverse groping guided by results. It determines which theories are hopeful and viable not by the strength of their arguments, but by their effectiveness in practice. The answer to the question of whether a theory works is not found in philosophy books, but in the real world. Only those with rich and deep practical experience can make clear and high-quality judgments about philosophical theories.
This judgment is not scientific, but aesthetic in nature. Therefore, it is logically impossible (and undesirable) for people without sufficient experience to engage in meaningful philosophical discourse.
I am not saying that philosophical works are unreadable, or that one should not dabble in philosophy. However, I do want to dispel the notion that philosophy can be studied and that studying philosophy leads to philosophizing. Being able to recite philosophical concepts does not make one a philosopher, just as being able to paint the Mona Lisa with one’s eyes closed does not make one Leonardo da Vinci.
To summarize, philosophy should certainly be explored, but do not think you are a “professional philosopher” just because you can memorize philosophical ideas. Even more importantly, do not use your knowledge of philosophy to lecture others when you are in your twenties or thirties.
It is ironic that someone who understands philosophy could lack cultivation. While this is not necessarily a problem for engineers, mathematicians, and physicists, it is a dealbreaker for philosophers. It is like studying management without discipline, psychology without language skills, finance without numerical intuition, law without procedural awareness, or theology without faith.
You can write many philosophical papers and analyze precedents adeptly, but it is meaningless if you lack cultivation. It is natural that people who love philosophy would find this viewpoint “dangerous,” but those who attack it sneakily, make veiled sarcastic remarks, and accuse it of being “pseudo-philosophy,” “nonsense,” and “misleading the young” simply because they dislike it fundamentally have not truly understood philosophy.
Think this through carefully. If you cannot pass this basic test of cultivation, you are wasting your time dreaming. To claim that this viewpoint must be nonsense from someone who does not understand philosophy is simply a manifestation of your inner fears. It means that you are not worth the effort of understanding or responding to, regardless of your viewpoint.