Your complimentary articles
You’ve read one of your four complimentary articles for this month.
You can read four articles free per month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please
Question of the Month
What Philosophy Book Should Be Required Reading?
Our readers give their thoughts, each winning a random book to read.
When it comes to ‘the’ book that’s required reading, there are a few parameters we can set in place that will aid us in finding an answer: timelessness, applicability, and wisdom. While this choice may seem arbitrary, I believe that these attributes are a subset of what we can call ‘greatness’ in a book, since all of these attributes are markers of probable presence of certain important values or truths in a given book. For example, ‘timelessness’ might indicate that there’s something fundamental, essential and important there that served past generations well and has therefore been passed on. ‘Applicability’ relates to usefulness, and while not a sufficient attribute in itself, it is desirable. since it adds a tangible dimension to the value of a philosophy. That is, it shows that the value is not restrained to the intellectual sphere, but manifests itself through acting out one’s philosophy in the material world in one way or another. Finally, ‘wisdom’ alludes to philosophy’s original endeavor as the ‘love of wisdom’, and while we may disagree on what constitutes it, I believe there’s a quasi-universal acceptance of the value of wisdom, whatever it might be. With these constraints in place, that still leaves us with many potential candidates for this position, such as The Bible, The Nicomachean Ethics, or The Meditations. For the lack of any better criterion at this stage, I will let my personal bias play into this and suggest The Odyssey by Homer (c. 8th C. BC). My personal affiliation with the sea has made me aware of its gargantuan strength as an analogy for death, love, and the journey. And what better narrative thread is there than the story of Odysseus? A story of homecoming that highlights the necessity of suffering and is a testament to why anything worthwhile, such as love, requires one to say no to the temptation of hedonistic, infantile joy (the promise of Calypso) and which reveals that meaning is born in the affirmation of death and finitude.
Filippos Georgios Sarakis, Athens
As the written history of philosophy goes back thousands of years, it’s difficult to endorse one single text over others. It is also difficult because philosophy’s remit is so broad: from ethics to epistemology, to the philosophies of mind and science. Every philosopher is liable to nominate a key text in their own sphere of interest. With my own interests in mind, I am liable to nominate Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason (1781) – perhaps the most important work of philosophy in the last 250 years. However, it is not one for the casual reader: it is long, and even its author described it as ‘dry, obscure, and prolix’. Consequently, I suggest Descartes’ Discourse on Method (1637) as a good alternative: it’s short, written simply and clearly, and its arguments are designed to be easily understood, so it is ideal for beginners in philosophy. It is also a cornerstone of modern thought. Descartes deliberately went back to what he believed were the most basic truths to create a completely different, thoroughly modern mode of thinking– making his own rational and logical deliberations based upon clear, distinct ideas progressed simply and deliberately without resorting to the ideas of other earlier thinkers – and inviting the reader to do the same. Almost all subsequent philosophers in the Western tradition work in the shadow of this little book, and the questions it raises are still being deliberated. For example, some modern philosophers (notably David Chalmers) have come around to Descartes’ idea that mind and body are two distinct substances. This has led, amongst other questions, to philosophers returning to one even Descartes couldn’t answer satisfactorily: since they are distinct substances, how can mind and body interact with each other? Therefore, because of its brevity and accessibility to the general reader, and its historical importance to the development of modern philosophy in Western Europe and elsewhere, I would suggest that Descartes’ Discourse should be required reading.
Jonathan Tipton, Penwortham, Lancashire
The most famous book by Plato did not win its fame by accident. Plato’s Republic has something to say to every reader, whether advanced in philosophy or a beginner. It has so many layers, and has been interpreted in som many ways. As Julia Annas observes, Plato has been described on the basis of this work as “a revolutionary, a conservative; a fascist, a communist; a fiercely practical reformer and an ineffective dreamer.”
Even someone who has previously heard nothing about political philosophy will be led by Republic to actively consider a whole series of philosophical questions. It draws you in so smoothly with its thought experiment of imagining the ideal state, that it’s impossible to remain a passive reader. It demands an active reader, not only because of the subject matter, but also because Plato writes so engagingly that it’s almost impossible for the reader not to take a position on what he reads. One of Plato’s proposals, for example, is that children should not know who their biological mother is, so that, on one hand, the children will consider all the women of the state as their mother, and on the other hand, all women will consider all children of the state as their own.
The dialogue’s central concern is justice: Plato is trying to visualise the ideal state through the search for justice in the soul. For instance, why is it worthwhile for a man to live a just life when he sees unjust fellow citizens living a life of abundance?
Even if the ideal state is not something that could exist (and Plato’s aware of that), the theoretical examination is worthwhile because it has an expanding effect on the intellect. And since a society is made up of individuals, therefore, if any improvement is to be expected, there must be firstly some improvement of the individual: a ‘perfect’ man means a ‘perfect’ society. The improvement of the individual comes first according to Plato; and surely this path goes through the study of philosophy.
Konstantinos Akritidis, Thessaloniki
In today’s world, full of governments with various political intrigues, and conflicts between themselves, the philosophy book that should be required reading is none other than that of Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince. It relies on Machiavelli’s first-hand knowledge of politics, gained from several diplomatic missions. A lthough written in 1535, it has great relevance to modern governments. It gives advice to rulers (princes, Prime Ministers, Presidents, dictators…), on how to exert law and order after seizing power, and prompts them to adapt harshness and deception as necessary tools. It informs the reader on how regimes may seize, maintain, and defend their power, encouraging them to embrace cruelty and deception as necessary. According to The Prince, no action is unjustifiable if it contributes to the overall strength and stability of the government. In the modern day, ‘Machiavellian’ denotes cunning and a drive to use whatever means necessary to gain power. It’s used mainly as an insult, describing a treacherous or cut-throat approach to politics. At the same time, many political analysts invoke Machiavelli’s lessons as a guide to a clear-eyed view of politics. Through Machiavelli we learn to differentiate between benevolent and maleficent governments, taking into consideration selfishness, viciousness, and acquisitiveness – still hallmarks of certain of today’s regimes. Thus it gives us courage, perseverance, energy, skilled intelligence, and fearlessness to deal with the world at large. We learn that governments consider themselves as not bound by established ethical standards unless expediency demands it. Some governments may break all ethical standards to remain in power, yet appear to be virtuous, with a duplicity with which they hold power. The Prince teaches us how governments gain autocratic power and hold it, where states and leaders are prompted by ambition as much as by their ideals. In addition, it justifies doing things that are not considered right in themselves, but which in their circumstances are right to stop more morally objectionable behaviours.
K.A. Karvelis, Parkinson, Australia
Paul Giamatti stars as the curmudgeonly Paul Hunham in Holdovers, a 2023 movie about two adults and a student who spend Christmas vacation together at a New England boarding school. Hunham teaches classics at the school, and Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations (c.170 AD) is his go-to gift for Christmas or other occasions. Hunham makes some claims about the Meditations that aren’t correct, but he is spot on with his respect for the book.
Aurelius repeatedly emphasizes our social nature. What truly makes us human is our willingness to work with each other. That’s not always easy, of course. We are advised not to be angry with the annoying people we meet, but remind ourselves that we will continually encounter interference, ingratitude, ill-will, selfishness, and that’s life. It is impossible to escape the faults of others. We can, however, do our best to understand the perspective of others, and recognize and deal with our own issues.
Reason is our greatest asset. Aurelius would undoubtedly agree with David Hume that reason often is the slave of our passions; but he would never argue that this ought to be the case. We can at least somewhat escape the hold that our emotions have on us through self-examination; through a commitment to truth and justice; and through a willingness to seriously consider the opinions of others and change our minds when we’re mistaken.
Human life is brief, and our worth is best measured by what we devote our energy to. We should focus our time and energy on doing what should be done with ‘seriousness, tenderness, and justice,’ and never forget that doing nothing can be an injustice.
Aurelius’s timeless observations are relevant for our connected world, where people are too often anxious, angry, distracted, and isolated. Our lives are stressful, but we can escape the external pressures that bombard us not by distracting ourselves, but ‘by going within’, if only for a short time, to refresh and refocus ourselves, and be ready to deal with the challenges that come with being a social animal. The Meditations is concise, and accessible to all; and as Paul Hunham suggests, it is the one philosophy book that should be required reading for everyone.
Howard Landis, Naples, Florida
Though richly complex is the thought
And obscure the language be
No other tome bar Being and Time
Is as vital to philosophy.
Heidegger’s the author-architect
Of Dasein and authenticity,
Half etched in fervent forest glade
Half in poetic archaeology.
Of all the books to have shaped thought
Of all the words to have moved the mind
Sein und Zeit is the golden light
Leading Man to Being find.
Thrown into world and circumstance,
Architects of ourselves are we
No measurement beyond that of Man
And no divine predestiny.
So students boldly venture forth
With open minds reap what lies within
Let thinking flow and Being stir,
In Heidegger let your work begin.
Bianca Laleh, Totnes, Devon
I can’t imagine a single tome that would address the interests of all philosophy audiences. Stoics, for example, probably wouldn’t be interested in the same reading list as, say, Epicurean Hedonists (I could be persuaded). For someone such as me, who only recently developed a burning curiosity about philosophy, a subscription to Philosophy Now should be on everyone’s reading list! (Clearly, I’m not above pandering.)
Many I’m sure, would think of Machiavelli’s The Prince, Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, and especially Marcus Aurelius’s Meditations, all of which should be on every philosopher’s reading list. However, the one book that should be required reading for every high school student, as well as for any adult news addict who tries to stay informed of current issues, is Thank You for Arguing by journalist Jay Heinrichs (2007). Citing philosophers from Socrates, Aristotle and Cicero to modern-day ones like Homer Simpson and Barack Obama, Heinrichs writes, “Logos, ethos and pathos appeal to the brain, gut and heart of your audience. While our brain tries to sort the facts, our gut tells us whether we can trust the other person, and our heart makes us want to do something about it. They form the essence of persuasion” (p.40).
Persuasion is what Fake News is all about. In Chapter 14, Heinrichs shows the reader how to spot ‘Seven Deadly Logical Sins’ – seven of the many logical fallacies spewed out in social media, politics, and debate in general. “While logic has formal rules,” he writes, “rhetoric, on the other hand, has virtually no rules. You can commit fallacies to your heart’s content, so long as you get away with them. Your audience has the responsibility to spot them.” That is precisely why Thank You for Arguing should be required reading: an audience has the responsibility to spot fallacies – to determine the veracity of statements by political candidates, preachers, salespersons, news pundits, and anyone else who attempts to persuade.
Jess Merrill, Daphne, Alabama
Dooming any text to the status of ‘required reading’ is a dangerous endeavour, not least because any university student worth their salt knows that deeming something ‘required reading’ is a surefire way to ensure it remains in a dust-covered pile in the corner! It’s a misguided endeavour also because the category of topics which come under the umbrella of ‘philosophy’ is so expansive that I challenge any philosopher to find a text which covers a significant subsection of the discipline. In fact, I worry that pinning down one text which should be considered the starting point for all philosophers poses a significant risk of isolating the large amount of readers to whom the topic picked does not pique their interest. That is not to say that there are no books which the general population of philosophers would benefit from reading. If I were to determine one book which I believe every philosopher should read, it would be any introductory logic text. By arming the philosopher with a basic understanding of logic, the reader is granted the ability to critically assess any argument within any text for logical inconsistencies. A basic understanding of logic, therefore allows philosophy to be practiced, within the framework of any discipline, any topic, and any text. This maximises the accessibility of philosophy so that everyone can practice it, with no requirement of an interest in the ‘classic’ philosophical debates (such as moral philosophy or mathematical philosophy). Of course, identifying an introductory text to logic which is sufficiently stimulating so as not to deter any philosopher from the discipline out of boredom, is a challenge in itself, and I welcome recommendations.
Storm Rothwell, Durham
There are two additional questions implicit in the main question: To what extent should any book be required reading, except perhaps in the context of (say) a National Curriculum – since compulsion may not engender comprehension? And, if the object is to encourage good philosophical thinking, then what book would be appropriate for different groups or ages? So let me try to suggest suitable books for different groups, leading to my overall choice.
At the junior level, up to (say) twelve, the important things are to encourage a love of reading and the pleasure of discovery that it brings, including an awareness of the environment and the reader’s relation to it – hopefully a lifelong habit. So I suggest a suitable read would be Kipling’s Jungle Book (1894) – part fact, part adventure story, part acute observation of nature.
For the next age group, say 13-25, it would be desirable to encourage an appreciation of the nuances of language, the cadences and rhythms of speech, and the value of focus and succinctness, plus the need to question at all times – as Socrates advocated, and Kipling (again) expressed in a brief poem: “I had six honest serving-men / They taught me all I knew / Their names are What and Why and When / And How and Where and Who.” So a comprehensive volume of poetry would be most appropriate.
Between 25 and 35, as people begin to make their way in life, a clear understanding of the history and culture of other people and nations should be developed, coupled with suitable knowledge of languages. A suitable book to encourage appreciation of cultures, histories, and religions would be The Origins of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam by John Pickard (2021). From early adulthood onward, the idea should be to cultivate an open enquiring mind on which to base rational judgement; sensibly reasoned convictions which one can logically defend unless proved wrong; and moderation in speech and action, doing nothing too weakly or too vehemently – together, the basic principles of Stoicism. For this my favoured book would be A.C. Grayling’s The History of Philosophy (2019): relatively easy to read and digest, and quite comprehensive of the major sources of philosophy. It would be most effective after the preparations suggested above. But prepared thus or not, it is the right material for the maturing mind, and would make moderate, thoughtful citizens of us all, hopefully leading towards a saner world. So if I have to choose only one book, Grayling’s would be it.
David Morris, Oxford
Unwilling to name a single philosophy book that should be ‘required reading’, I’d rather emphasise free choice. So, here are two books, to stress the freedom to choose.
Bryan Magee’s The Great Philosophers (1987) provides good examples of what philosophy has comprised and how to engage with it critically. Fifteen contributors participate separately, in dialogue with Magee, the contributors chosen because of their philosophical expertise. The discussions began as a BBC TV series, and were subsequently transcribed into the book. At timely moments, Magee was conscientiously adept at clarifying and accurately summarising progress during the dialogues.
Clare Mac Cumhaill’s and Rachael Wiseman’s Metaphysical Animals (2022), is an example of a reaction to a then-neglected and underrepresented area and source of philosophy: feminist metaphysics. The metaphysical animals are Elizabeth Anscombe, Philippa Foot, Mary Midgley, and Iris Murdoch. They sought to revitalise interest in philosophy that embraced the compelling, profound, and mysterious aspects of life, meaning and reality. Mac Cumhaill and Wiseman write with expertise and flair, employing metaphysical insights to the ethics that confronted issues in the context of the Second World War, including Third Reich holocaust horrors, as well as Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Colin Brookes, Loughborough
I will demonstrate why no philosophical book should be required to be read. I’m not saying that no philosophical book should be read, I’m saying that requirements aren’t relevant; and because this is just a fun thought experience, I’ll be controversial and also say that requirements are wrong.
What is philosophy? Throughout the whole story of philosophical thought, there is still no consensus. Philosophy can be clarification, therapeutics, or creativity, and maybe others I don’t know. I’ll put a funny twist: philosophy is about destruction; it’s about destroying old ways of thinking – which presupposes the creation of others. So, a philosophical book should be a book about the destruction of a view, a way of thinking, or a way of assembling a problem. This sounds dangerous.
If it’s dangerous, why should we read philosophy? I mean, Socrates was doing philosophy – he was destroying old ideas – and from what happened to him [he was executed for ‘corrupting the youth’, Ed], it is valid to say that philosophers should be afraid. Nevertheless, we should read philosophy because philosophy is capable of changing us, by destroying in us some ideas and creating others. This is good because reality doesn´t stop changing, and when the world changes, the subject has to change with it. So to keep up with reality we need to be able to destroy, to make philosophy. But to say that x, y, or z philosophical book is a requirement, is a trap that doesn’t enable us to keep up with the change, to create and destroy. If I say ‘This philosophical book is what you need’ I’m saying that this is the book that will destroy your thought and create new thinking; but then, no other book which could destroy the first recommendation can be required, or in the end it would just prove that the first one is not a requirement. And then we stop the dialectics: we stop destruction and creation, and stop the ability to keep up with reality – so we destroy philosophy, which is wrong.
Requirements are irrelevant, and can even be bad. So we should read any philosophy book we please.
Gianluca Vieira, Lisbon
Next Question of the Month
The next question is: How Can We Make A Computer Conscious? Please give and justify your answer in less than 400 words. The prize is a semi-random book from our book mountain. Subject lines should be marked ‘Question of the Month’, and must be received by 11th November 2024. If you want a chance of getting a book, please include your physical address.
Advertisement
