Neocities.org

I never formally studied philosophy although I have read some, particularly existentialism while doing my honours thesis. I lost all my philosophy books years ago in a strange theft. Always happy to include reviews by others, although I think that kind of review would also fit your own site. If any of us (or someone else) feel a desire to read philsophy again, I'll add it. Thanks

(Somehow I am very interested in whoever your burglar was.) I didn't formally study philosophy either, I'm just very interested in the field and would've liked to read about some titles from your perspective. If I ever feel an urge to opinionate about the body without organs again, I'll gladly submit some of that in text form to you, though.

That would be great. The ‘burglary’ was really my fault. I put out a cache (see About page re geocaching) based on “A Room of One’s Own” by Virginia Woolf, which I consider philosophical. I included my philosophy books for others to swap in the cache, thinking I might get something new. Instead, a non-cacher found the cache and just stole it.

This is a link to that cache listing, if you’re interested (ignore the how to join panel and scroll below it): https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC25BBX_a-room-of-ones-own?guid=08178ab8-06db-400d-83f6-1de506f9f3a0

Of course, you're probably very familiar John Berger's Ways of Seeing which I reviewed on our site. My review of that is very basic. You could have probably done a better job. I'm currently finishing his novel, G.

Oh my. What a sweet cache idea. I'm sure the thief was a struggling young Ph.D. candidate whose uni library burned down and he ran out of text to quote.

Then, desperate and asking himself whether life made any sense or driving to the next town to use their library was worth it, he stumbled over your cache and felt that his prayers - though he would never admit that he did actually pray, for he was an academic - had been answered.

I think your reading of John Berger was perfectly fine, for it was intended as a basic text. That's why it was influential - a mainstream audience was able to grasp what he wanted to say, which is very rare and therefore all the more delightful.

I only remember fragments of the text, and that was still enough to write my rant about the negligence of art historians to accept they're praising porn.

Thanks. But is there anything else to be serious about?