/philosophy/ - Philosophy

the republic is a good place to stat as any, specifically the embed related translation, which is the G. R. F. Ferrari, Tom Griffith. covers all the bases you asked about except for idealism, because it didnt exist yet.

by linguistics, do you mean arguing about the definition of words?

also in relation to your request bout ethics, im not sure what you mean by an objective viewpoint, as most philosophy is attempting to be objective.

How 'new' are you going for?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0789444550/sr=1-2/qid=1445464096/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1445464096&sr=1-2

Also that anon that recommended the Republic is right, it's basically Plato's magnum opus, and it covers so many topics that he was the first to introduce to the study of philosophy.

>Ethics/Morality

This is the only linked book I haven't read but it seems concise to me:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0812977785/sr=8-1/qid=1455465457/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=&qid=1455465457&sr=8-1

^^^Hopefully they don't try to liberalise Nietzsche.^^^

>from an objective viewpoint

Do you mean it tries to establish absolute morality or that it tries to examine it as a natural sociological phenomenon?

If the latter, go Dewey and Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals.

Also, Chapter 9 of Beyond Good and Evil, especially section #260:

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/nietzsche/1886/beyond-good-evil/ch09.htm

>Linguistics

I've been wondering how to start this myself.

>>3585

I think he means how I mean it too. The scientific study of the structure of languages. How they work, how they evolve, etc.

>Idealism

A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge by George Berkeley.

>Time/Mortality

This instantly made me think about Heidegger's Being and Time, but that definitely isn't "starter" material. I suppose existentialism in general might fit this theme (Heidegger is often included among them)?

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385031386/ref=olp_product_details?ie=UTF8&me=

Any criticism is definitely welcome.

>ethics/morality

Get a phil intro anthology. Most anthologies have famous classic essays on epistemology, ethics, theology, ontology, and sometimes some nice sub-topics like identity etc. Most people believe in "objective" ethics, ethical realism, but that actually tells you almost nothing.

>linguistics

Wittgenstein and read backwards or forward. Philosophical investigations has to be the most clear introduction book possible, but somehow plenty of people find it unclear.

Linguistics goes two ways forking into logical analysis or semantic analysis. They relate, but they differ immensely.

>idealism

Nothing. Idealism as a coherent tradition does not actually exist. According to some all of philosophy is de facto idealistic due to the element of conceptual thought involved.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/idealism/

Idealism as generally understood is really to do with 1) mental reductionism and the primacy of consciousness 2) realism of universals 3) immaterialism. These three things aren't even things that go necessarily together in any idealism.

>time/mortality

Heidegger is direct to the point on that, no other major philosopher that I know of is. Existentialists in general talk about the importance of a finite life in providing the urgency necessary for really appreciating life.

>>3587

>Wittgenstein

How does Chomsky compare to Wittgenstein? Is their work similar?

>>3588

Diametrically opposed.

Chomsky's theory is Kantian even though it seems he never read Kant. Wittgenstein's language theory has to do with social use, Chomsky's theory has to do with a fundamental universal grammar. While Chomsky ruled for a long time, the tide has been turning against him, but pure Wittgensteinian accounts of language are not popular in philosophy anymore.

>>3591

>While Chomsky ruled for a long time, the tide has been turning against him

What do you mean by this? Does this imply that Chomsky's work was once accepted to be of merit, but now is not?

>pure Wittgensteinian accounts of language are not popular in philosophy anymore.

Why is it not popular any more? Is it outdated or something?

>>3592

There have been communities discovered which do not have attributes of language which Chomsky said were necessary and fundamental such as recursive grammar. Regular empiricism is turning the tide.

>>3592

Chomsky's approach to linguistics was very unscientific in that it relied way too heavily on the personal intuitions of the self and not enough on empirical data collected from many languages.

There have been discoveries in Linguistics that have lead to a questioning of his "universal grammar" and other formerly "given" linguistic models.

>ethics

J.L.Mackie - Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong

Richard Joyce - The Myth of Morality

>time

Unreality of Time by Taggart was the kickstart to the current debates, introduced the concept of A- and B-theory

>idealism

Skip, SEP article will do.