Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I’m really getting back into sketching and painting again for the first time in years. It’s a fantastic feeling. I just wish I could get access to more canvas.

I was never great at drawing people, so that’s primarily what I want to focus on. That and dogs. I like dogs lol.

My other main hobby is playing in the kitchen. In honor of the Necrons being in the new starter, I baked up some croissants from scratch. First time making a laminated dough. Turned out pretty good and I learned a few things for next time.

 Nevelon wrote:
My other main hobby is playing in the kitchen. In honor of the Necrons being in the new starter, I baked up some croissants from scratch. First time making a laminated dough. Turned out pretty good and I learned a few things for next time.

Ah yes, the infamous French Bakery list. Back when only like 2 other armies had aircraft. Good times.

Lately I've become interested in the renaissance and the enlightenment, and taken to attempting to read some non fiction books on the subject amongst the endless black library novels and others I usually read. At the moment I'm on 'the critique of pure reason' by Immanuel Kant. the subject matter is difficult to get my head around but its certainly interesting. I've got a few more books on the enlightenment, and also plan on reading some of Da Vinci' work on art and science, and also tackling the communist manifesto and mein kampf at some point too. I figured I'd try to use my time more constructively than wasting it on the cesspool that is twitter.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Lately I've become interested in the renaissance and the enlightenment, and taken to attempting to read some non fiction books on the subject amongst the endless black library novels and others I usually read. At the moment I'm on 'the critique of pure reason' by Immanuel Kant. the subject matter is difficult to get my head around but its certainly interesting. I've got a few more books on the enlightenment, and also plan on reading some of Da Vinci' work on art and science

Adam Smith has the theory of moral sentiments. It's an interesting read, especialy when you've only read wealth of nations.
Kant is something that i'd never want to read not in german.

, and also tackling the communist manifesto and mein kampf at some point too. I figured I'd try to use my time more constructively than wasting it on the cesspool that is twitter.

Tbh, before you read the manifesto i'd reccomend Das Kapital (the first one not the other bunch), unlike the manifesto it actually is not just a glorified pamphlet but an actual advancement at the time for economic theory.
As for "Mein K(r)ampf", beyond the fact that it is the nutjob rambling it's also a crime against the german language and is more like a unrestrained speech of nonsense rambling with the overarching theme of the evil capitalo-bolshewik jews beeing behind everything and attempting to gain controll of the world.
can't reccomend.

Oh yeah I'm aware, it's more because it's a historically significant document.

I actually bought a hardback bound version of das kapital, a while ago, but when it arrived it was in German. And I'm definitely not at a level to read it ha.

Oh and meditations by Marcus Aurelius. I always thought stoicism was just about repressing emotions, but it's not that at all. Reading his works has legitimately changed the way I think about a lot of things.

Of course when it comes to Kant and his ilk the observations of the University of Wallamaaloo cant be overlooked

and of course its a stable universe its got horses in it, duhh

but late night over coffee'd gibberish aside best of luck

Well I don't really have much experience on the subject so I couldn't possibly say more as of yet. All I know is thinkers like that paved the way for the enlightenment, so there must be something worth taking from it.

edit. looking into the subject further, it appears I've picked what most seem to view as one of the most difficult texts to start my journey into philosophy, so I'm going to put it down and start at some earlier texts to create a broader base of understanding. I didn't seem to have any real issues grasping his concepts though, which is something. not like when I tried reading Nietzsche a few years back.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
Well I don't really have much experience on the subject so I couldn't possibly say more as of yet. All I know is thinkers like that paved the way for the enlightenment, so there must be something worth taking from it.

edit. looking into the subject further, it appears I've picked what most seem to view as one of the most difficult texts to start my journey into philosophy, so I'm going to put it down and start at some earlier texts to create a broader base of understanding. I didn't seem to have any real issues grasping his concepts though, which is something. not like when I tried reading Nietzsche a few years back.

Well Kant is "german enlightenment" and starts off a slew of schools that breaks away from Leibnitz and rationalists.Kant also has a rather remarkable breakpoint where he changes doctrines so to speak. Most prominently the critique of pure reason is preciscly that breakaway point.
However Kant is by far more friendly then some that came after him torwards their readers. Hegel is just disgusting to read f.e.

Also you are missing some parts of the process of enlightenment if you skip the frenchies, aka montesqieu, etc. And you potentially miss certain developments of the "image of man" when you ignore for exemple the more positivistic nature of people like Rousseau, which would come to dominate republicanistic thinking for political science in quite a way.

Not Online!!! wrote:
However Kant is by far more friendly then some that came after him torwards their readers. Hegel is just disgusting to read f.e.

You are 100% right though, of course. I don't recommended anyone "start" by trying to read Hegel, that's for sure. I "started" by other's commentary on Kant, rather than with Kant himself.

I think one of the better ways, one I didn't personally do, is to read the Greek classics, like Plato and Aristotle, because even some enlightenment stuff is still a response to that. Of course, I am not formally educated in Philosophy, so my approach is poor at best.

 H wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
However Kant is by far more friendly then some that came after him torwards their readers. Hegel is just disgusting to read f.e.

You are 100% right though, of course. I don't recommended anyone "start" by trying to read Hegel, that's for sure. I "started" by other's commentary on Kant, rather than with Kant himself.

I think one of the better ways, one I didn't personally do, is to read the Greek classics, like Plato and Aristotle, because even some enlightenment stuff is still a response to that. Of course, I am not formally educated in Philosophy, so my approach is poor at best.

to be blunt, alot of philosophy is bouncing around 2000+ year old questions, heck the question what is knowledge and how to gain that is one of the oldest and has spawned debates over centuries later.

Same but also tied in with the above is how sentience interacts with the body and the "leib seele problem". Which is hillarious because psychology and neurology now are at the same point with the same issue from their respective discipline as philosophy is since centuries.

 H wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
However Kant is by far more friendly then some that came after him torwards their readers. Hegel is just disgusting to read f.e.

You are 100% right though, of course. I don't recommended anyone "start" by trying to read Hegel, that's for sure. I "started" by other's commentary on Kant, rather than with Kant himself.

I think one of the better ways, one I didn't personally do, is to read the Greek classics, like Plato and Aristotle, because even some enlightenment stuff is still a response to that. Of course, I am not formally educated in Philosophy, so my approach is poor at best.

I think this is what I will probably do. Plato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius and Descartes are who I'll look at first I think. I've put the critique down and going to start 'the crisis of the European mind' instead.

Not Online!!! wrote:to be blunt, alot of philosophy is bouncing around 2000+ year old questions, heck the question what is knowledge and how to gain that is one of the oldest and has spawned debates over centuries later.

Same but also tied in with the above is how sentience interacts with the body and the "leib seele problem". Which is hillarious because psychology and neurology now are at the same point with the same issue from their respective discipline as philosophy is since centuries.

Reminds me of this meme:


I think part of that, from my lay-man way of thinking about it, is that in the sort of Heideggerian way, he was right that Cartesian Dualism is a pretty poor way to frame what is (maybe? likely?) going on. That being said, I am actually a psychologist by education but I also thing that neurology and neuro-physiology is important (but has a long way to go). But maybe that is partly the inner phenomenologist in me just tainting the waters though. I guess I see "value" in philosophy not as something to give "answers" but rather to interrogate, investigate, excavate what we are assuming in given stances so that we can figure out what is justified, worthwhile or useful. Or something like that.

queen_annes_revenge wrote:I think this is what I will probably do. Plato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius and Descartes are who I'll look at first I think. I've put the critique down and going to start 'the crisis of the European mind' instead.

I also found listening to podcasts about philosophy to be helpful to get myself in and grounded on just what was even being talked about in the first place.

That's what I've been doing, while I paint. Although it's hard to take it in properly while concentrating on painting.

You guys seem to have an interest, is it thread worthy? Or will it drift too close to religion and politics?

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
That's what I've been doing, while I paint. Although it's hard to take it in properly while concentrating on painting.

You guys seem to have an interest, is it thread worthy? Or will it drift too close to religion and politics?

I don't see any reason why we would have to get political there, plenty to discuss in philosophy that is not at all political. And even if we touch on theology, we needn't discuss religion either. If there is a thread, I'm sure I'll post in it and do my best to keep the whole thing on track.

 H wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
That's what I've been doing, while I paint. Although it's hard to take it in properly while concentrating on painting.

You guys seem to have an interest, is it thread worthy? Or will it drift too close to religion and politics?

I don't see any reason why we would have to get political there, plenty to discuss in philosophy that is not at all political. And even if we touch on theology, we needn't discuss religion either. If there is a thread, I'm sure I'll post in it and do my best to keep the whole thing on track.

You can keep it theorethical , also most enlightenment Philosophy had political consequences at the latest 1848 after that imperialism was the hot new thing and history aswell as theorethical concepts are not banned.
I guess it could be worth it.