Philosophy and sciences (1)

Jia L (John) Han

First, I write this series mainly in English. Why? Because it is fast to type in English (I have only limited time). In addition, all good textbooks and literature are in English. Furthermore, some intended readers do not understand Chinese.

In an earlier essay [1], I discussed the relationship among philosophy, sciences, and religion. If you know Chinese, I strongly urge you to read [1] carefully because I do not have time to repeat the points made in [1]. Below I will expand [1] and give supplementary comments. The commentaries here are terse. The reader is expected to study them, not simply read through them.

[2] explains my initial motivation to study philosophy. I wanted to help other Mainland Chinese to overcome the Marxism trap. I am glad that I did since I have learned a lot and the knowledge and experiences gained are useful to my own research. On the other hand, my effort has been largely a failure. I will come back to this later.

Now turn to our main topic. [3] is a textbook first published about 100 years ago. It is an introductory level textbook and perhaps too simple for a serious student. However, it contains some important information. For example, why did science branch out from philosophy? What does it mean?

Now comes serious stuff. On page 22 of [4], you find a quote “Plato is regarded by many as the greatest philosopher of all time; it has been said that all philosophy is merely a footnote to his work.” [4] is a middle level textbook.

The above statement may be a big shock to many. There are probably two reasons. First, their way of thinking and learning has been ossified into a closed system while Socrates’ way to pursue truth is an open system. I will explain this further in the future. The second reason is related to the first: they do not understand Plato’s work. In Smith’s Political Philosophy [5], it is said that one needs to read Plato’s work 10 times before understanding it. In fact, it depends how you read it. If you use ancient Chinese learning methods, you will not understand Plato’s work even if you read it 1000 times. In fact, Karl Marx never understood Socrates’ dialectical method. Had Marx understood Socrates’ dialectical method he would look like an idiot to call his own method dialectical.

You might ask how I should learn? First, have an open mind. This may sound unbelievable but many use study methods that guarantee they will never understand Plato’s works. More on this later. Second, I know two good books written by or interviewed with experts [6,7]. You may consult them from time to time.

References:

1. 韩家亮：哲学、科学、宗教之间的关系 http://hx.cnd.org/?p=162700

2. 韩家亮：我们需要学哲学吗？ 2015 年 08 月 30 日

3. George Stuart Fullerton, “An Introduction To Philosophy,” CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2011.

4. John Perry, Michael Bratman, John Martin Fisher, “Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings,” Oxford University Press, 7 edition, 2015.

5. Steven B. Smith, "Political Philosophy," Yale University Press, 2012.

6. Bryan Magee, "The Great Philosophers: An Introduction to Western Philosophy," Oxford Paperbacks; 2nd edition, 2001.

7. Ted Honderich, “The Philosophers: Introducing Great Western Thinkers,” Oxford University Press, 1999.