[!@#$%!]

intro: since i was probably 3 i was one of those little shits that keeps asking his parents "why?" "why?" "why?"-- when i was 11 i started having doubts about religion & smelling the bullshit & tormented my parents with theological questions at the dinner table which they couldn't answer.

education part 1: attended a catholic school, so they gave us a bit of philosophy-light, descartes, blah blah, nothing too heavy, but we read some stuff, the priests couldn't answer my questions either, but one did, he fessed up after cornered that there was no proof of any god and it was all a matter of faith. at last! thanks dude.

followed this by going to college to study science and a prerequisite was a course in philosophy of science, etc, so that was fun. befriended some older people/teachers/etc & i learned a lot discussing stuff with them, from (more) philosophy of science, phenomenology, etc. became interested in philosophy of science as a further pursuit but that got sidetracked when i reached the age of 20 and wanted more adventure.

education part 2: came to 'merica where philosophy wasn't a requirement, they gave you predigested "critical" shit and rote learning of opinions-- however, for grad school i had an advisor who was seriously into philosophy & read plenty of nietzsche, a whiff of adorno, some kant, some platonic dialogues, aristotle, banged my brains against wittgenstein (might as well attempt to read mayan hyerogliphics), took some courses in the philosophy department, and ended up realizing that i know nothing-- yes?

the motivation for philosophy for me has been pretty simple: i have a problem, i want a solution that is not readily available, so i have to think about it-- moral problems for example. once that i was in a tough situation but didn't want to be a sociopath, for example, i thought for a while, "without a deity, is there a basis for morality?" i ended up doing what i wanted in the end, but the question would be a philosophical one, and i got my answer in sociobiology ("there's an evolutionary basis for morality, so morality is in our nature and not a simple imposition from the outside" or some such crap conclusion). im not saying this is correct or works for you or anybody else, im saying this is where i found a role for it-- to solve problems.

there was some spanish philosopher twat (ortega y gasset) who wrote that we think only when we don't know what to do-- i think he was partially correct from my thing above. however, there is the wankathonic side of it which is the pleasure-- to think for the pleasure of it & fuckitall. during my 3rd-world days it was fun to get together with friends, get shitfaced on beer or stoned out of this reality, and speculate about all manner of issues we couldn't know, like "what is the mind" or some other shit. here in 'merica however that doesn't exist as far as i can tell-- de tocqueville wrote that americans don't know how to have a conversation, they only know how to preach, and so far he's been mostly right after almost 200 years (1830 or so?), it's a lot of cock-contests and very little dialogue. you go to other countries however & you see that shit again-- i had a bricklayer friend in israel who liked to read spinoza during lunchtime, and discuss politics in depth. here it's all as i've said a cock-contest but i've learned to adapt. still, i miss that type of conversation.

anyway, i forgot what i was going on about, but the question-- why? 1) to solve problems, 2) for pleasure

those books are nice picks, i hope you enjoy. you sound btw like the kind of person who would like to get shitfaced on 50 beers and discuss if there is such thing as time and if so what is it, ha ha ha-- shit, it's been ages since i've done that. sad.