How to Read a Philosophical Text?

Notes on My Text Reading Practices

When it comes to reading, most of us imagine someone comfortably and enjoyably reading a book. For me, however, the situation is a little different. I liken the act of reading to distillation. I have a reading technique where I break the text down into pieces and mentally map it out into folders.

I categorize it into three sections:

• Before Reading
• While Reading
• After Reading

BEFORE READING

First of all, I believe that the way we engage with philosophy, our motivation to be interested in philosophy, is something that needs to be discussed.

It’s impossible to read all the texts from the 2500-year history of philosophy. Therefore, our relationship with philosophy should begin with identifying the texts that answer the questions we seek. What is the reason you want to study philosophy in depth? What question keeps you awake at night? Or what do you consider to be important? These are good starting points. Because philosophy is not an activity in which we find a single hidden truth in a closed box and suddenly everyone is enlightened. It is a practice of thinking that is defined in action.

Every text is an encounter. Just as you wouldn’t want to listen to someone you meet on the street for hours without a meaningful reason, the same applies to texts. Most likely, everyone you meet on the street has a story to tell. Out of all these stories, you would choose the one that is meaningful to you and try to listen to the best of them. I believe that you should approach every text with the same sensitivity.

Aristotle has a saying: “The aim of knowledge is action, not knowledge itself.” What is the purpose of acquiring knowledge? This is an interesting question, as the true value of knowledge is often debated.

Last year, a friend of mine who became interested in philosophy told me that they bought and read Aristotle’s book “Metaphysics”, made a few notes, but did not understand most of it, and sarcastically asked what they would do with the knowledge they did understand. That was a very good question. What is my purpose in reading this text?

Therefore, my first advice: Identify your question. Write down the question you are seeking to answer on a piece of paper and stick it to your desk, wall, or the inside cover of that book. This turns the reading into a meaningful pursuit for you. For instance, a book like “Critique of Pure Reason” addresses a multitude of questions. If you’re not conducting a specific study on Kant, reading the sections relevant to your curiosity and inquiry can be much more beneficial. Identifying a question is one of the most crucial parts of any research, thesis, or paper. Remember that this advice also applies to writing.

My second piece of advice is to narrow down the field you’re going to read to an area that is meaningful to you. Once you’ve identified your question and worked out the purpose that makes this reading practice meaningful, naturally focus on specific eras, thinkers, or books. For example, if your curiosity revolves around a gender issue, reading pre-Socratic natural philosophers may not be very helpful. Let your question create a personalized list of philosophical history.

I think having a historical flow within the personalized subset of philosophy history you narrowed down for yourself based on your question is effective. The reason for this is very simple and fundamental. Like all other intellectual activities, philosophy is conducted through concepts. These concepts have a development and transformation through historical, social, and cultural dynamics. Therefore, reading in a historical context is key to understanding the text. For example, what Plato, John Locke and Edmund Husserl understand by the term ‘idea’ is not the same.

However, if your question relates to the problem of consciousness, you may not want to go through the hassle of reading that entire historical process. In this case, of course, dictionaries would be your go-to resources. I recommend the following two:

• Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Dictionary of Ancient Greek Philosophical Terms

WHILE READING

When I read, I rewrite the book in a certain way. Let me explain in a little more detail what I mean by that.

I use the application Notion, and when I start taking notes on a book, I first write an introduction in my own words. Then I organize the content in my head and create subheadings for it. I divide the information I read into a few categories that are meaningful to me, creating the backbone of the book in my own way. It becomes a personalized table of contents.

Reading the same book doesn’t lead people to construct the same subgroups. This is because everyone engages with the book based on their own questions, so different sections will resonate with different people. Thus, on the one hand, you’re creating your own book, guided by your own question. For me, reading is a process of digestion. Just as the stomach takes in what it needs and discards the rest, I believe your relationship with a book should be similar. Trying to memorize every piece of information doesn’t go beyond being a carrier of knowledge. Questions like, “Why did I read this book? What question am I looking for an answer to? What am I going to do with this information? What is the purpose of this inquiry?” will help you make the reading experience meaningful and productive in your own way. So what we should do when we read can essentially be described as being a kind of information curator. Just as a curator of contemporary art prepares an exhibition on the theme of “migration” by collecting and rearranging works by different artists on the theme of migration, we should do the same with our reading. The aim should be to create a general picture, even if it still looks like an incomplete puzzle at the moment.

AFTER READING

The main issue is mapping out the knowledge. I do this mapping process twice. First, as already mentioned, I restructure the text according to my ideas as I write. Secondly, I create diagrams with applications like Miro if necessary.

Discussing and talking about a text I have read is also one of the best methods of reading. From my own experience, I can say that I only understood Aristotle when I tried to explain his concept of matter. So a text is first read with the eyes, then written down with the hands, spoken aloud and finally blossoms anew in dialogue.

Is that difficult and complicated? Yes, it is. But philosophical texts don’t promise us a rose garden anyway :)