Jan 22, 2023Liked by Donald J. Robertson

Socrates was required reading of my liberal arts school even though I was an engineering major, i.e. a math and science guy. I found the actual assigned writings of Socrates impenetrable and suspected much was lost in translation. (I am curious who has the best English translation of Socrates or Plato for that matter.) I had a similar reaction to reading Schopenhauer's philosophies though I found it fascinating that Schopenhauer tried to reconcile the Buddhist philosophies of the Asia with the philosophies of the West like Stoicism back in the 1800s. My bottom line is that it is best to start out reading philosophy a simplified summary much as what Donald Robertson has provided to get the most out of your reading. If you don't get an overview then everything you read will be out of context and make little sense. For example, Robertson was at least able to explain the "Socratic method" in one simple story that failed to be conveyed in most law school by giving a simplified overview of Socrates's purpose for the method. The purpose of the Socratic method is to recognize what you think you know and actually don't is the greatest source of error. In engineering, we call this a faulty assumption but it is a fundamental truth that is shared by both disciplines of engineering and philosophy. (I think I just pegged the needle on the geek-o-meter. Ding, ding, ding!!)

Expand full comment
Jan 29, 2023Liked by Donald J. Robertson

A silly non-philosophical, non-psychological thought but...Michelangelo, like Socrates, was a stonemason?!

Expand full comment