Isn't there another thread about this topic active right now?
A decade ago, I went into physics at a hunch, but since the 5th semester had often questioned whether I should have gone into literature or philosophy. I dated a bunch of philosophy student as I really like hearing them talk and learn from it, so that's my angle. I got a few texts, e.g. this old book series by Mach that I never really started in honesty. I read some Kuhn and Hegel and I suppose half of Wittgensteins works (ALL THE BOOKS).
Regarding your statement, I don't think learning those things does fundamentally make you "understand", but I also think it's fun an interesting.
Is there anything you recommend in particular? I've got a broad birdseye view on the history of philosopy post Hume and, to contribute, I recommend the 100 or so videos by this diseased Theologian of the Weaton collage
https://youtu.be/ARarjQYOhA4>>11451849A variant of academic philospohy is found on /lit/. It's what you'd expect, strong tribes are Hegelian dialectic memes, all the way up through Deluze to Landian acc. And the right wingers (Spengler, maybe even Evola, and Ted if you count him) between modernism all through postmodernism.
>>11451856I'm skeptical whether people are susceptible. Feynman had to do more liberal courses and didn't take anything away from it. Some people are just "engineers at heard", want to use their hands and not contemplate the problem of induction if they don't get anywhere after 30 minutes.
Physicists often end an argument with "this is absurd, so it can't be true" mentality.
>>11451862Uninformed cheering for one or the other interpretation of quantum mechanics is not what I'd call philosophy discussions.
