Reddit mentions of Nicomachean Ethics

> You could make the exact same argument against English but you won't because it would be inconvenient to you.

Indeed, it would be inconvenient to us in the real sense of the word. Without English I would be totally cut off from the rest of the world. How would I get help with any computer related stuff if I couldn't read sites like stackoverflow? Please point me to Hindi YouTube channels which match up to the quality of the highly informative and educational channels like Veritasium, CGP Grey, VSauce, Crash Course etc.?

Let's say I wanted to learn Blender. There you go: https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewPPrice

Please point me to Hindi alternatives.

Let's say I wanted to learn QT Creator. There you go: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL2D1942A4688E9D63

Please point me to Hindi alternatives.

Let's say I wanted to learn anything from the best universities in the world. There you go:

1. https://www.coursera.org/
   
2. https://www.edx.org/
   
   Please point me to the Hindi alternative.
   
   Let's say I wanted to read Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotle (Originally in Greek). Please point me to a translation in Hindi. Here is the translation to English.
   
   Thanks to my knowledge of English I can benefit from the largest common pool of knowledge humanity has ever witnessed to which people all over the world have been contributing since centuries. If I had to learn one language other other than my mother tongue, it would undoubtedly be English. To even suggest Hindi as being nearly the same as English in terms of utility is nothing but lunacy.
   
   Don't forget to link me to all the Hindi alternatives though.

I wouldn't worry too much right now about knowing everything perfectly; you're still finding your foundations and areas of interests. Sophie's World is sorta where I started too, and I'd recommend maybe going back and seeing if there are any philosophers that you found particularly interesting. That would be one way to start.

If you want to go deeper into general philosophy, Bertrand Russell's History of Western Philosophy is like a much (much much much) denser and more intense version of Sophie's World. If you're not sure where to go next, this will give you a much more in-depth view of even more philosophers (although he skips Kierkegaard, which is my main gripe with the book, but oh well, still would recommend it). One thing I personally loves about this book though was how he connected philosophy to history, art, science, poetry, and so many other fields. It's really made me want to switch my major to...Everything! Philosophy's still at my core, but this book really got me interested in other fields as well.

To go further in recommendation, Plato's dialogues are generally considered to be pretty important to a foundation of philosophical understanding. The Apology is a pretty easy one; it's less of a philosophical text in the traditional sense and more a sort of kick-off for the field, where Socrates explains why philosophy is important, and why he pursues it. The Republic is also pretty important for understanding Plato's political ideas. All his dialogues, though, are generally pretty good reading, and I'd recommend reading some.

To go past that, Aristotle's often a good read, primarily his Nichomachean Ethics is a pretty good introduction to his philosophy, much of which is a response to Plato.

To move onto modern philosophy, it tends to get a bit more technical and tricky, but a great and very easy-to-read modern philosopher is Descartes. I'd recommend Meditations on First Philosophy and Discourse on Method in Discerning Truth in the Sciences as good introductions to modern philosophy, which tends to focus on slightly more technical forms of logic, rather than conclusions drawn from more vague observations.

(NOTE: found a book that combines both the Descartes writing mentions into one here).

Another important thinker who might not be hard to understand but who will definitely shake you is Nietzsche. This documentary is a pretty good introduction to him, but if you want more, I'd recommend this collection as a good overview of his philosophy. His works are quick reads, but they will stick with you, and I consider him to be one of the most important thinkers to understand the modern age.

Eventually though, you'll need to start taking on more challenging texts. Hopefully though, you'll be well informed enough by that time to have found a niche that you personally are interested in, which will make it much more interesting and fun! Never hesitate to come here with questions. Good luck!

At least for Anarchists or other left-libertarians it should also be important to actually read up on some basic or even fundamental ethical texts given most political views and arguments are fundamentally rooted in morality (unless you're a orthodox Marxist or Monarchist). I'm sadly not familiar enough with applied ethics to link collections of arguments for specific ethical problems, but it's very important to know what broad system you're using to evaluate what's right or wrong to not contradict yourself.

At least a few very old texts will also be available for free somewhere on the internet like The Anarchist Library.

Some good intro books:

• The Fundamentals of Ethics by Russ Shafer-Landau
  
• The Elements of Moral Philosophy by James and Stuart Rachels
  
• Ethics: A Very Short Introduction by Simon Blackburn
  
  Some foundational texts and contemporary authors of every main view within normative ethics:
  
  
• Nicomachean Ethics by Aristotles for Classic Virtue-Ethics. Martha Nussbaum would be a contemporary left-wing Virtue-Ethicist who has used Marx account of alienation to argue for Global Justice.
  
• Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel (or Emmanuel) Kant for Classic Deontology. Kantianism is a popular system to argue for anti-statism I believe even though Kant himself was a classical liberal. Christine Korsgaard would be an example of a contemporary Kantian.
  
• The Methods of Ethics by Henry Sidgwick for Classic Utilitarianism. People usually recommend Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill, but most contemporary Ethicists believe his arguments for Utilitarianism suck. 2 other important writers have been R. M. Hare and G. E. Moore with very unique deviations from classic Utilitarianism. A contemporary writer would be Peter Singer. Utilitarianism is sometimes seemingly leading people away from Socialism, but this isn't necessarily the case.
  
• Between Facts and Norms and other works by the contemporary Critical Theorist Jürgen Habermas may be particularly interesting to Neo-Marxists.
  
• A Theory of Justice by John Rawls. I know Rawls is a famous liberal, but his work can still be interpreted to support further left Ideologies. In his later works like Justice as Fairness: A Restatement you can see him tending closer to Democratic Socialism.
  
• Thus Spoke Zarathustra by Friedrich Nietzsche for... Nietzsche's very odd type of Egoism. His ethical work was especially influential to Anarchists such as Max Stirner, Emma Goldman or Murray Bookchin and also Accelerationists like Jean Baudrillard.
  
• In case you think moralism and ethics is just bourgeois propaganda maybe read something on subjectivism like Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong by J. L. Mackie
  
• Or if you want to hear a strong defense of objective morality read Moral Realism: A Defense by Russ Shafer-Landau orc

off the top of my head:

Meditations, with The Inner Citadel as a reader

Letters from a Stoic

A Guide to the Good Life by Irvine

Do The Work by Pressfield as well as The War of Art by Pressfield

Managing Oneself by Ducker

Man's Search for Meaning by Frankl

What Predicts Divorce by Gottman

Nicomachean Ethics

Models by Manson seems to be popular on reddit

So Good They Can't Ignore You by Newport, as well

I'm currently reading Triumphs of Experience by Vaillant and find it insightful.

My philosophy class used the Irwin and Reeve

> Absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

http://www.amazon.com/Nicomachean-Ethics-Aristotle/dp/0872204642

Alright I wrote a bit about the first three. They took me a while so I'll post these now and I'll edit in any more that I do later.

"Meaning of Life" or, more accurately, how to live according to certain doctrines of philosophy

Platonism - This is a strange word to use in this context, as platonism either refers to Plato's philosophy as a whole, which talks about a lot more than just how one ought to live, or Plato's central idea that there exists two realms of existence: the visible world containing all with which we interact directly and the intelligible realm containing the true, most "good" versions of everything, which he calls the Forms. If one were to live life according to Plato's teachings, "learn more" wouldn't be entirely wrong, per se, but it'd be a disservice to Plato to stop there. To live the best life according to Plato is to strive to not only reach as close as possible to the true Forms of the intelligible realm, but also to spread that information to others. One must, according to Plato, overcome the ignorance that life seems to naturally guide us towards and instead push through towards the truth, and follow that up by returning to those who are guided into ignorance and show them the truth. This concept is represented in Plato's famous Allegory of the Cave - a good, short, easy to understand video explaining it is this one. If I were to put Plato's teachings back into a short blurb about how to live so it'd fit into a picture like OP, it'd be something like "be unrelentingly open-minded and zealous." Even that doesn't do Plato total justice and there's so much more to his philosophy than just this, like all of his works containing the teachings of Socrates. Further reading: The Republic, Apology, Euthyphro

Aristotelianism - Aristotle is famous for his work on many, many different things within philosophy, but within the context of how one ought to live one's life, his central idea was virtue ethics. For Aristotle's virtue ethics, there are a number of characteristics a person can possess and for each one, there is an excess in it and a deficiency in it which are equally detrimental to one's excellence and should be avoided. For example, let's take bravery as a characteristic. If someone isn't brave enough, they're a coward. If someone is too brave, they're rash. Aristotle says that someone who has mastered bravery, that is someone who has neither a deficiency nor an excess in this trait and is therefore achieving virtue, has successfully reached the golden mean. The golden mean is the middle, most excellent version of a trait between the deficiency and the excess. Any trait, no matter what it is, can be a vice instead of a virtue and in order for it to be a virtue one must be capable of exercising just the right amount of that trait. A deficiency in generousness makes someone selfish while an excess of it makes them frivolous. One who is striving towards the golden mean in all aspects of his character is living virtuously. As far as actually getting to the golden mean, Aristotle held that habit is the key; one who does brave things will become brave, one who does selfish things will become selfish, etc. So, to live life according to Aristotle's teachings is to habitualize actions which bring one closer to the golden mean in one's characteristics. In this sense, "be good," like Plato's blurb, isn't totally off but it doesn't do Aristotelian virtue ethics justice. Further reading: Nicomachean Ethics

Cynicism - Cynicism is something I've never studied or even heard of within the context of philosophy. A quick google search showed me that it was once a philosophy that was extremely different from what we consider to be cynicism today. All I'll say about cynicism is that the OP image is obviously giving it its modern definition, based on the blurb it gave it, which is hilarious, and the fact that the blurb itself is "be self-sufficient" is even more hilarious. Modern cynicism is about distrusting the authenticity or "genuineness" of others, instead assuming that people do things selfishly or, more simply, for the wrong reasons. It also encompasses a great deal of pessimism. It's literally just edginess. Cynicism doesn't belong anywhere near a discussion about how to live; the cynic is in the next room mocking the people in the discussion.

My preferred version is Terence Irwin's Second Edition (2000). Note that this is not to everybody's preference; it's accessible, straightforward and it flows well, but it does translate a few Greek terms that would have been worth keeping! As always, reading around the subject will add these terms to your vocab.

I stumbled across this r/philosophy thread - Joe Sachs' Edition and Lord's Edition are amongst the most popular. Does anybody else have a preferred translation?

In terms of Aristotle's great-souled man and his understanding of friendship, we unpack these concepts in Part IV of this podcast series! I hope you enjoy the show enough to stick around until Part IV!

Sincerely,
Jack

I did! I sent him a rather lengthy email where I recommend Rerum Novarum, along with:

• Quadragesimo Anno
  
• The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church
  
• Centesimus Annus
  
• This site
  
• A bit of Aristotle
  
• and Thomas
  
• The CDF's Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation
  
  
  Question: what do you mean that its your party platform? I noticed that it was created by redditors, but what for?
  
  
  EDIT: I also sent him a recommendation for this book. In case you haven't read it, I can't recommend it highly enough.

You're far better off reading these books than wasting time with Peterson. Peterson's works are a soothing balm, these men sought after absolute truths -

https://www.amazon.com/Meditations-Thrift-Editions-Marcus-Aurelius/dp/048629823X

https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Pure-Reason-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140447474/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773842&sr=1-1&keywords=kant

https://www.amazon.com/Madness-Civilization-History-Insanity-Reason/dp/067972110X/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773870&sr=1-4&keywords=foucault&dpID=41FzjCBzJJL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

https://www.amazon.com/Nicomachean-Ethics-Aristotle/dp/0872204642/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527773951&sr=1-6&keywords=aristotle&dpID=31b2stlDDgL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

https://www.amazon.com/Republic-Dover-Thrift-Editions-ebook/dp/B00A73FJ10/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1527774019&sr=1-4&keywords=aristotle+the+republic&dpID=51dfJWGupmL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch