Stop Asking Which Philosopher to Read First

The better question is what you need to understand, and why it matters to you.

One of the most popular questions that people ask those who study philosophy in an academic setting is where should they start with philosophy? Now everyone will have their own preferences and say stuff like Plato or whatever, or say things like ‘read the original author’ - but that sounds to me to be a bit of a wishful idea that seems to assume something like ‘if you read things long enough, then certain things will ‘just click’’. Well, no, unfortunately, it doesn’t always work that way. Despite what some may claim, philosophy cannot be done in an isolated ivory tower. That idea sometimes suggests that you, beginners, are told to read ‘the canon’ as though persistence alone would produce comprehension, yet philosophy usually needs orientation, context, conversation, and importantly, a reason to care.¹

So, where should you start if you want to read philosophy as a fresh-faced newbie? And also, I want to ask you something in return: why do you want to read it? To which I will give you my own answer later - may help, may not.

The first thing I want to say to you is this: don’t follow others' reading advice as some kind of law, as there is no ‘correct way’ to read philosophical works. I mean, you should follow some advice, sure, but only to see if it helps you: like, read the conclusion first in a paper; that way, you know where they are going, and then you can see if they actually get there. But, again, you want to use the reading method you know works for you. For example, I cannot read in silence; I have to read aloud as I am more of an auditory learner. Do not be afraid of breaking the taboo (yes, taboo) of having to sit in a kind of contemplative silence to read. If you are like me, then audiobooks will be your ‘reading in public’, and you don’t need to sit in an overpriced, bougie coffee place where an 18-year-old dripping in 80s discarded fashion looks at you like you're scum because you say 'regular milk’ (as the Americans say) to listen to the textual delights.

There are also no ‘performative reading’ jabs from the vaping intelligentsia that way. Also, sometimes it just clarifies the argument the author is making when you say it aloud or hear it spoken. That is me, though, you do what you do to get the most out of reading. But if you shun audiobooks because you're a weird ‘only learn through reading in your head’ fossil, then it's time to brush up on your antiquated ideas, pal. So, use what you know works for you.

Secondly, I would ask you not to look for AUTHORS. Do not sit and think ‘oh, I should read Plato because he is important’ or ‘Kant is someone I need to read because I Kant go on living like an illiterate philistine’. No. Don’t do that, that is one way into the ‘what the fuck is this shit’ garden. Instead, think about the problems you want to understand. The best way to do this is to search a university’s philosophy website. They will usually (although not always) have some first-year undergraduate reading lists available, or a ‘what to read before you get here’ list.² This is also a good way to get to grips with which problems you find interesting and some ideal places to start with what actual philosophers are saying about that specific issue. This also helps you avoid shooting in the dark. Call this orientation to your interests: a problem-led route into philosophy. From there, you can then go on to see what Plato says about P, or Aristotle, or Schopenhauer, or whoever the fuck. That way, you don’t need to waste precious time reading something you find boring - life is short, and philosophy is too big. These authors are a map, not a punishment or final say on the matter.

Third, get a philosophical dictionary. There are two worth getting, actually, one edited by Simon Blackburn and the other by Ted Honderich. One is small, the other is massive. Think of them as useful aids for the ridiculously technical language and terms you will be encountering from here on. You can get them pretty cheap from a second-hand book store, but well worth the weight. Especially Honderich’s one. Also, if you're new to philosophy, or something you have gotten into because you watch YouTube and want to be like the posh people sitting and debating, get a hold of 'Critical Thinking’ and ‘Logic’ FOR DUMMIES. I shit you not, these are actually pretty fucking good. Everyone acts like they are fluent and well-versed in philosophy, like it is simply some kind of Platonic recollection happening, that ain't the truth. I give you permission to get hold of these books and sharpen your skills. People are afraid to say they started here - you won’t be one of them.

Fourth, find a reading group. As I said earlier, philosophy is not done in a vacuum. You need to talk to people about what you are reading. You simply cannot just sit, read, and understand what is going on as if you were in some strange, philosophical, solipsistic existence. One of the most important aspects of learning philosophy at university is the tutorial/seminar room where you discuss what you have been reading that week.³ Even if all you have is an online thing - like a Zoom call, or a Substack thing - find people to talk to about the things you're learning about. I repeat: NOBODY DOES PHILOSOPHY IN ISOLATION. Even loners like Emil Cioran and Spinoza had, big word alert, interlocutors.

Fifth, get a copy of a history-of-philosophy book. Two I recommend are: ‘Introduction to World Philosophy’ edited by the always excellent Bonevac (he has a YouTube channel with some of his lectures) and Cottingham’s ‘Western Philosophy: An anthology’ - if you treat this like a textbook, you can’t go wrong. Cottingham is lucid and very readable. Also, get Schroeder’s ‘Intro to Continental Philosophy’ for a broader view. Use them for historical perspective, for practice in critical questioning, and for testing where you agree or disagree with the author. Do not treat these as your ‘education’ but as orientation, context and a way to understand key terminology.

So, let's retrace the steps: when beginning with philosophy, first identify which method of reading works for you and stick with it, then resist the urge to read people and focus on what problem you find interesting - the rabbit hole is always deep. Thirdly, when you start with philosophy, it helps to have a reference book of some kind - a philosophical dictionary will help you out. It is also essential that you find a few people (even 1 person) to talk to about these issues you're reading about. Your views will remain ill-formed if not thought out and tested against someone who isn’t you. We all know we think our ideas are amazing, that is why it hurts when others show us how stupid they are. Fifth, get one of those long histories of philosophy books. You kinda need to know philosophy’s history as most of what was written and discussed during Parmenides’ life is still relevent today: try talking about the concept of time without talking about the concept of change - Parmenides, Heraclitus, Aristotle, Plato, Democritus, and all the other famous people with awesome names grappled with that question, and you kinda need to know what they had to say about the matter. Think time is an illusion? Parmenides has your back, but then explain how change works without it. Cool stuff like that.

That is what you need to start reading philosophy, but recall the question I want to ask you: Why do you want to read it?

That is not a flippant question, meant to dissuade you. There are stories of people being pulled into philosophy by a single encounter with a text. You may know the reportedly famous story of Hannah Arendt, who was reading Kant one day and decided to study this fascinating subject (I was told this once in undergrad - how true it is, I cannot say). However, for every person like them, I would say there are about 50 people who leave and never return. No problems here. But why do you want to read these works on these problems? Does the lack of understanding about ‘how should I live the best life’ keep you awake at night? Does striving to understand what being in-itself is make you want to quit your day job and reflect and write about it? These are not so hyperbolic as you may think.

Take me. I was a van driver for many years. I left school at 13 or whatever, because reasons. Later on, I was fortunate to be given a copy of David Hume’s Dialogues concerning natural religion. I read it. Did I understand it? Not a chance. So, I put it in the drawer for a long time. Then I was cleaning stuff out and decided to read it again. I went online to help me out, I bought a dictionary for the big words, and I read that thing. It took me two months to read it (before I realised I had to read it aloud). Then I got interested as the new atheist debates were blowing up. So I got more into books that broached that subject. Then, long story short, I discovered I was reading Aristotle and Plato and trying to answer the question, ‘why are humans so fundamentally flawed?’ But being isolated was getting me nowhere; I had ideas, but nobody to talk to about them. Then one day I said fuck it. I enrolled on a ‘second-chance’ College (Americans - in the UK, university and college are two different things) that would give me what I needed to go to university. I quit my job, ended the five-year relationship I was in, and ended friendships (because it turns out changing your life is enough to make people think badly of you), all to study philosophy. Now I am interested in the philosophy of Death and Grief, Ontology, and the revival of existentialism as a bona fide philosophical method.

Sure, I didn’t have to do all that, but I needed to do it (for those who don’t know, I hold that philosophy begins in need, not wonder like Aristotle). Now, you may not have the same need, but if you want to start reading philosophy, you will have at least a smidgen of that drive, focus, and intent. In short, your reason to care. How long you persevere is on you. The point, then, is this: Do not start with cold reading Kant’s three critiques simply because it’s Kant.⁴ Rather, start with what you need to understand. Find the problem that has already begun disturbing you. Then get the tools, the books, and the people who help you think it through. That is where philosophy actually begins.

Andrew 4/5/26.

News!

I have now paid off the first year's tuition fee for the PhD. Only another 8k to go over two more years. If you want to support my work, you can donate to the Gofundme found in my chat.

Special thanks to everyone who supports, helps, or inspires me to keep going - to name a few: Gregory B. Sadler Romaric Jannel, PhD Jonathan Stein George Shaw Michael Irshaad Mona Mona

1. By the way, the “reason to care” part is super important.

2. On this list, you will find some staple works like Bertrand Russell’s ‘Problems of Philosophy’ or Simon Blackburn’s ‘Think’, or whichever academic they have that has recently released a book. When I was in undergrad, it was Duncan Pritchard’s “What is this thing called knowledge” - you don’t know who he is, but then neither do I.

3. In principle. The tutorials/Seminars I went to at Edinburgh University were often full of people who sat in silence, didn’t read the stuff, or were shopping for clothes online. Don’t be like these duds and try to find people who are not asshats looking to ‘win’ philosophical one-upmanship.

4. Or Plato’s Symposium, Aristotle’s De Anima, Schopenhauer’s World as Will and Representation, or any other big brain book simply because it’s by someone you ought to read. For example, I have never read anything by G. E. Moore. Why? Because I don’t have the time or energy to read him. Maybe when I retire, or get a long ass flight.