If you guys want some real philosophy, you should read the last few books Jack Kerouac wrote before he died, when alcohol had really begun to eat away at his stream of consciousness.

If you felt someone's understanding of life, easing of emotion, depended on a book, what would you give ?
It would depend on your knowledge of the person and resources available.
For some, a book of philosophical humour - or cartoons as in existential comics.
A good one on Stoic Apathy:

https://existentialcomics.com

Thanks!

There's a reading group on r/Nietzsche for Geneology of Morals starting mid-May. I think there are about 10 people showing interest. If half that many actually show up it will be a pretty good group.

So, can we get this group reading started? I'm quite curious about what might come about from reading Kierkegaard's Concept of Anxiety.

Before we start, who wants to be the leader of the reading group?

Does anyone have the PDF, available?

There's a reading group on r/Nietzsche for Geneology of Morals starting mid-May. I think there are about 10 people showing interest. If half that many actually show up it will be a pretty good group. — frank

Just finished the second essay. It’s an interesting read up to now.

It's dark. Fasten your seatbelt. :)

Have the people involved in that group read Beyond Good and Evil too? I am kind of seeing Birth of Tragedy as a prequel to these two later works. I’ve read everything in between; if you have care to comment?

I think I heard one say they read BGE about a year ago.

There does not appear to be a groundswell of interest in that book here but it can be found at memory of the world library.

There does not appear to be a groundswell of interest in that book here but it can be found at memory of the world library. — Valentinus

Thanks for link. I will take a look.
Perhaps interest would swell if passion ignited and stoked ? Give some more background ?

So, can we get this group reading started? I'm quite curious about what might come about from reading Kierkegaard's Concept of Anxiety.

Before we start, who wants to be the leader of the reading group? — Wallows

You tell us the specifics.

please don't share the gold.

The second title is: A Simple Psychologically Orienting Deliberation On the Dogmatic Issue of Hereditary Sin. As the work progresses, what is being approached is how to understand our experience of the demonic in ourselves and others.

As others here have suggested, reading one part of Kierkegaard is always connected to other parts. It can be daunting to undertake. On the other hand, the efforts made by Reidar Thomte and Albert Anderson to bring this web of connections in view through the footnotes is one of the best introductions to it.

But there is a theme that runs through all of the writing and is his voice no matter what else is being said. On page 192 of the linked edition from a draft of the published work:

"I believed that every science should direct itself to this task and that all idle knowledge debases a man and essentially wastes his time, although he may be more deeply debased and waste his time in a worse way. It is said that he who sleeps does not sin, but a man whose life has been absorbed in idle knowledge has nevertheless in a profound sense slept away his life. I believed that in order to grasp and to express this meaning of life it is also appropriate that the single individual who is capable of it should apply himself to studies of a scientific nature, but in such a way that such study would have its validation in an education whose ultimate expression is to impress the idea upon his own life. This something that is not seen in our time. Instead, one sees too often a person who slovenly passes through life, performing all the common tasks of life as if they hardly concerned him; otherwise he is easily aroused when the talk turns to some stupendous idea, like an association of men who separately are unable to accomplish something simple would be able to accomplish something difficult, a performance similar to that of the alehouse keeper who thought he would become rich by selling his beer for a penny less than he paid for and still make a profit on the grounds that it is the quantity that does it."
Pap. V B 53:29 n.d. 1844

Well, at least I did not charge anybody for it.

Fair enough

please don't share the gold. — emancipate

Why do you consider it 'gold'?

...what is being approached is how to understand our experience of the demonic in ourselves and others. — Valentinus

Hmmm, OK. I guess there is definition or special understanding of what is 'demonic' ?

It can be daunting to undertake. On the other hand, the efforts made by Reidar Thomte and Albert Anderson to bring this web of connections in view through the footnotes is one of the best introductions to it. — Valentinus

I understand that any serious discussion of the book would need to be structured so that a pleasantly daunting challenge might be undertaken.

I haven't taken a look yet but interest has been piqued. Thanks.

Following previous advice as to preparatory reading, here is the SEP entry for Kierkegaard:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kierkegaard/

And a podcast:

https://philosophizethis.libsyn.com/079-kierkegaard-on-anxiety
With transcript:
http://philosophizethis.org/episode-79-transcript/

YouTube?

Why do you consider it 'gold'? — Amity

The sites that let you read almost any philosophy work for free are gold! I guess most people know them anyway.

Well, the question is pretty straightforward. The leader just kind acts as a moderator and hopefully knows the specifics of the book to some degree. Furthermore, he or she can correct others where they may have gone wrong.

The sites that let you read almost any philosophy work for free are gold! I guess most people know them anyway. — emancipate

Ah OK, understood. I thought you meant the book.
I enjoy freebies too but sometimes the translations are not the best.
After searching or asking for advice, I tend to buy a real book.

Like I need another book :nerd:
That's why I need a bit of persuasion...or motivation...why should I buy this book ?

That's not the specifics. That's the generalities. The specifics would be you designating which book we're going to read and your declaring yourself the moderator.

As I noted 9 days ago:

I vote for Fear and Trembling, but am open to whatever, but let's choose something because the debate about what to choose and how to choose will likely go on for pages if we let it. — Hanover

Tell us the specifics.

That's not the specifics. That's the generalities. The specifics would be you designating which book we're going to read and your declaring yourself the moderator. — Hanover

That would be undemocratic. I already proposed what book to read. Maybe some poll is in order to address this issue democratically. Fear and Trembling is as good a pick as anything else, and I don't have really high standards here, so I'll stick to generalities.

Tell us the specifics. — Hanover

So, I'll designate you, given that you've shown interest in a reading group of some sort. Does that work out well?

The leader just kind acts as a moderator and hopefully knows the specifics of the book to some degree. Furthermore, he or she can correct others where they may have gone wrong. — Wallows

I think that it might be an idea that any leader of a book discussion is more of a manager. Rather than someone who has already invested time and energy into a specific translation of a book. And it wouldn't necessarily be about correcting others.

Someone who has experience in such, like jamalrob and other mods. I've been looking through previous time-limited readings. For example:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/37/reading-for-october-the-extended-mind/p1

A discussion manager could lift any discussion whenever it would get bogged down.
Other than that, it could be a free for all. And that might be fun too.
Have parallel threads ?

Have parallel threads ? — Amity

The mods hate that. Anyway, this thread is just to gather interest and asses what book to be read. It's fulfilled its purpose, and if Hanover agrees to become the manager, much like how StreetlightX is wonderfully managing the Philosophical Investigations thread, then all the better.

The mods hate that — Wallows

Has it ever been tried ?

1. One thread for a serious structured discussion. Time and text limited.

2. The other for the inevitable sidetracks where any potential present and future followers can comment.
Linked to the original.

Guess that might be a bit overkill. Not to mention messy. Yeah, forget it. Just a thought.

this thread is just to gather interest and asses what book to be read. — Wallows

Got that. However, other issues have been raised and are relevant.
Just like last time.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5076/next-reading-group-proposal

Happy discussing :smile:

Got that. However, other issues have been raised and are relevant.
Just like last time. — Amity

Mission accomplished? We will see in due time.