Reading the texts: what the..

[HossRyams]

So I've been trying (very hard) to read Nicomachean Ethics and am having so much trouble doing so. It's so confusing how the sentences are structured and I have to read extremely slow.  Even at that, I still have trouble comprehending what is going on. I ended up reading the summaries and analyses from SparkNotes to get the slightest idea of what was going on in each Book, which did help when I returned to the text, but, it's still confusing.

How is everyone else approaching it, or am I hopeless at reading?
I also have to read Gorgias and gather quotes and make notes etc. by the of the holidays.

Thanks in advance!

[EvangelionZeta]

Philosophy is difficult, there is no doubt at all about that.  I would recommend either asking specific questions on the forums, continuing to use SparkNotes/work at it hardcore, or just waiting for your teacher/s to help you when you get back to school.  Don't worry, it WILL make sense with enough work - that's the pleasure of philosophy.

What are you finding difficult in particular?

[HossRyams]

Thanks for your reply! I don't have any problems with the arguments themselves (although they were probably not covered in depth in the 'translations' I've read), just reading the actual text itself and grasping the purpose and meaning of each sentence. If it's a more 'main' argument then it makes sense to me and I've taken note of those, but there are plenty of paragraphs where I am close to clueless on its meaning.
Do we actually need to completely understand each and every bit of the book or are the particular passages we need to focus on? I know for the rest of the "texts", the teacher said he will print out the necessary passages.

However I did ask for advice from a student who got 50 in 2012 for philosophy who said he'd just have a brief read first because he found it confusing to read the first time, and that it was more important to read them again after having studied it. But the teacher did ask of us to collect quotes and highlight the arguments so I feel that my understanding needs to be quite up there

[brightsky]

Yeah, reading the original texts can be quite difficult. Every philosopher has his/her own style of writing. Unfortunately, while the Ancient Greeks were very good at structuring their treatises in a logical manner, they were not very good at expressing themselves clearly. Also, they, as a collective, cared very little about putting forward precise definitions of words, which, in my opinion, renders most of their arguments void and meaningless. But I think, at this stage of year, reading 'summaries' of arguments online would suffice. Your teacher will most likely help to deconstruct and decipher the cryptic language of ancient, and many modern, philosophers. Leave the texts till you get to them in class.

[HossRyams]

Thanks also for you reply, brightsky.
Yeah I guess I'll have a "brief read" of the two texts if I find the time, but will prioritise reading clear translations for now and then seriously get into them when the teacher deconstructs it for us.

Thanks

Also did any of you read external sources, even just online opinions written by university students or modern philosophers? I was thinking that could help, and I recently listened to podcast which discussed the first 2 books of Nicomachean Ethics. xD

[HossRyams]

... Well this is embarrassing. After looking around at the old posts, I believe I ordered Nicomachean Ethics translated by a different person opposed to the version selected by VCAA. I downloaded a pdf translated by the "right people" (David Ross?) and it seems to be far more understandable. Thanks guys. Hahahahah

[FlorianK]

looking at the exam, philosophy seems so boring besides Section D

[EvangelionZeta]

Yeah, reading the original texts can be quite difficult. Every philosopher has his/her own style of writing. Unfortunately, while the Ancient Greeks were very good at structuring their treatises in a logical manner, they were not very good at expressing themselves clearly. Also, they, as a collective, cared very little about putting forward precise definitions of words, which, in my opinion, renders most of their arguments void and meaningless. But I think, at this stage of year, reading 'summaries' of arguments online would suffice. Your teacher will most likely help to deconstruct and decipher the cryptic language of ancient, and many modern, philosophers. Leave the texts till you get to them in class.

A few responses:

1. The Ancient Greeks are actually pretty straightforward, as far as philosophers go (tried Heidegger?).  Yep, it gets worse from here...
2. What words don't they clearly define?  The meaning of most of the Greeks is reasonably clear IMO, and often the ambiguity surrounding certain words (eg. eudaimonia) is more a problem with bad translators of Ancient Greek.
3. I think it's a very far stretch to say that the Greeks were meaningless.  Maybe Aristotle is rather bizarre, but I do want to see how you could justify Plato as being "void" (like actually, interested in what you have to say).

looking at the exam, philosophy seems so boring besides Section D

The exam is boring, perhaps, but the subject is deadly fascinating.

[HossRyams]

I also personally find it endlessly fascinating! Particularly studying what makes up of a good life (unit 3) - I mean, I ponder this everyday; always debating whether I should study more or enjoy my life more, whether the hard work is worth the loss of some 'pleasure' and what balance will make me the happiest on the whole; and here I am studying about that, haha!
But I guess it's not for everyone. When I first heard what the study of philosophy was, I thought it sounded like a waste of time to question things, and now I'm thinking of majoring in it within a BA in the future ._.

[FlorianK]

Oh sorry , I judged the subject by the questions from the exam, which looked more like memorizing what some philosophers said.
Sorry

[HossRyams]

Oh sorry , I judged the subject by the questions from the exam, which looked more like memorizing what some philosophers said.
Sorry

HAHA no need to apologise ^_^ We're all entitled to our opinions here :]
Besides, we find what philosophers said to be very interesting bahahaha