Where to start LEMMings Reading?

A reader writes:

I'm currently a graduate student in political theory (in a political science department) but I've become very interested in a much wider range of philosophical areas.  Not too long ago I stumbled onto your blog, of which I've become a regular reader, and I noticed you recently gave some advice to someone regarding where to begin with Nietzsche.  I was wondering if you know of, and could recommend, several good places to begin regarding the philosophy of mind and the philosophy of language, and to a lesser degree epistemology and metaphysics.  Ideally I'd like to find some books that give a good overview of the history, as well as the contemporary debates (although I don't know if my ideal is unrealistic).  Any direction, advice, or recommendations you could provide would be much appreciated.

I thought it better to let some of the many experts who are readers offer suggestions, which would no doubt benefit this student as well as others.  Non-anonymous comments strongly preferred, as usual; please post only once, comments may take awhile to appear. 

Comments

[Paul]

I am not a LEMMing expert (I do moral/political philosophy), but I found Scott Soames' 2-volume "Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century" to be helpful, but also very accessible. It covers Moore, Russell, Wittgenstein, Logical Positivism, Quine, Strawson, Lewis, Kripke, and more.

Let me add that I also liked the "Where to Begin With Nietzsche" post, and think it would be great to continue doing this for other topics.

[Lee Walters]

Things that I have found useful as a student of Phil Logic/Language and Metaphysics

Crane and Farkas' Anthology on Metaphysics does a good job of providing classic and contemporary reading on a variety of topics with useful commentary by the editors. This is a good place to start. (Disclosure: Tim is one of my teachers).

I also liked Scott Soames' History of Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. Soames has his own opinionated take on things, but this does not strike me as a bad thing. Good for Russell, elements of Quine and Kripke amongst others.

Lewis is always good but where to start? I started with Causation which gives nice overview of his theory of counterfactuals. Naming and Necessity is a great read and introduction to a host of issues in Language/Metaphysics.

[Michael Pershan]

I have found this guide from the University of London to be very helpful. Check it out!

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/philosophy/LPSG/contents.htm

[Justin]

In the philosophy of language, the book /Language and Reality/ by Michael Devitt and Kim Sterelny gives a good overview. Also, the second half of the book, I think, discusses the philosophy of mind (at least as it relates to philosophy of language).

[Eric]

I'm certainly not an expert in these areas, but I really like E.J. Lowe's "A Survey of Metaphysics" (OUP, 2002). It's an authored introduction, but it's very nicely written and opinionated to boot.

In a graduate epistemology class, we used an anthology called 'Knowledge' by Bernecker and Dretske (OUP, 2000) that seemed quite inclusive. The Oxford Handbooks series has been helpful to me in the past in fields outside of my comfort zone...the epistemology handbook (by Moser) has some nice survey articles.

[Chris Hallquist]

Here's from an undergrad, who doesn't know the literature all that well, but knows what's accessible:

For philosophy of mind, check out David Chalmers' and Daniel Dennett's books on consciousness. You're going straight to the leading representatives of their particular positions, and luckily they're both clear writers, accessible to someone who knows nothing about the field. Jaegwon Kim has a nice introductory book, if you're interested in a broader view of things.

For metaphysics, I can't say much, other than that Michael Loux's introduction wasn't as useful as I was told it would be. I'm just getting into Kripke's Naming and Necessity, and thus far it looks quite accessible. Plantinga's Nature of Necessity looks, at first glance, rather dull and pointless, but I think there are legitimate claims that it clears up some confusions in the area. Maybe something to wait on until other things in the literature have given you a headache.

Richard Feldman is great on epistemology. He has a thin little introduction out, and I'm looking forward to reading more of his latest stuff on argument and disagreement when I have the time.

[Tom Donahue]

I certainly am not an expert in L, E, M, or M. But I am, like your correspondent, a political-science political theorist, interested in learning about LEMM. I took several upper-level philosophy courses to pursue that interest. Here's what I'd recommend for philosophy of language:

A. P. Martinich, ed., The Philosophy of Language. This collection of readings will take you back to Frege. It's standardly assigned in philosophy of language courses.

Sybil Wolfram, Philosophical Logic: An Introduction. Decent coverage of analyticity, necessary truth, reference, truth, and meaning. And philosophical logic is the intersection of the philosophy of language, epistemology, and metaphysics.

Some hold that a better text is:

A. C. Grayling, An Introduction to Philosophical Logic. Good coverage of analyticity, the a priori, truth, meaning, reference.

But I've not been able to lay hands on it.

Once you've read those, Tyler Burge, "The Philosophy of Language and Mind, 1950-1990," Philosophical Review 101 (1992): 3-51, will give you a good sense of the directions taken by debates in philosophy of language during those years.

[Alyssa Ney]

Jaegwon Kim's "Philosophy of Mind" textbook, now in its second edition, is a wonderful introduction to the philosophy of mind - particularly the metaphysical issues.

[Porter]

I came here specifically to recommend the Dretske and Bernecker anthology mentioned above. It begins with Gettier and then moves forward through debates both historical and contemporary, and is filled with articles by various big names in epistemology (Burge, Putnam, Quine, Davidson, Jaegwon Kim, etc.).

Bernecker also has a smaller collection entitled "reading epistemology" which has a more contemporary focus, with a thorough introduction and analysis before and after each piece. Both collections are quite good, although the first is certainly more comprehensive than the second.

[Stewart]

Writing as a student, and not an expert, I can say that I enjoyed the following introductions:

Authored introductions (300 level courses):
Pojman - What Can We Know?
BonJour- Epistemology: Classic Problems and Contemporary Responses.
Kim - Philosophy of Mind

Anthologies (400 level courses):
Heil - Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology
Crumley - Problems in Mind
Pojman - The Theory of Knowledge: Classic and Contemporary Readings

[Daniel Harris]

For language, I'm not sure that there's anything better than to dive into the primary sources, and I'm not sure there's a better way to do this than to get a copy of Martinich's "The Philosophy of Language". My copy became quite dog-eared within a few months of my discovering phil. of language, and I still return to it, several years later.

[grad student]

the SEP (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) is a great place to start on most every topic. it will also suggest further readings. you can browse the articles at plato.stanford.edu

[Sandy Goldberg]

If the deeper history is what one is after, I thought that J. Alberto Coffa's book THE SEMANTIC TRADITION FROM KANT TO CARNAP was quite good. Another nice one is Robert Hannah's KANT AND THE FOUNDATIONS OF ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY.

Also, it strikes me that Kripke's seminal NAMING AND NECESSITY could be profitably read (and re-read again and again) by anyone interested in LEMMing-related work: not only does it continue to remain seminal, but it is also nice preparation for Soames' two-volume set, since Kripke is the hero of that history.)

There are nice anthologies on analytic philosophy, too, which those interested in LEMMings-related work might do well to peruse. The one that comes first to mind is Martinich and Sosa's ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY: AN ANTHOLOGY.

Finally, although this is too heavy-going for the beginner (and the intermediate!), it might be nice to work up to some of the more recent things that David Chalmers has been doing in two-dimensional semantics; he explicitly motivates this work by appeal to an attempt to bring together what he calls the "golden triance" of reason, meaning, and modality, and situates this work in his (admittedly programmatic) thumbnail sketch of 20th-century analytic philosophy. One need not endorse his two-dimensionalism to appreciate his attempt to bring the LEMMings topics together as he does. (See especially the first few pages of his contribution to the recently-published OUP volume entitled TWO-DIMENSIONAL SEMANTICS, eds. Garcia-Carpintero and Macia).

(With thanks to Matthew Mullins for reminding me of some of these.)

[paul raymont]

Here are some good sources in philosophy of mind.

Category A -- Single-author introductions

The best very basic intro to philosophy of mind is Matters of the Mind by William Lyons (Routledge, 2001; ISBN: 0415937884). Jaegwon Kim's Philosophy of Mind, 2nd ed (Westview Press, 2005; ISBN: 0813342694) is also very good; it's pitched at a more advanced level, so it should be good for a grad student from outside phil of mind. The other two books in this category that I'll recommend are both by Tim Crane:

1. Elements of Mind (Oxford, 2001; ISBN: 0192892975) and
2. The Mechanical Mind, 2nd ed (Routledge, 2003; ISBN: 0415290317).
The 2nd Crane book is more focused on artificial intelligence.

Category B -- Anthologies ('greatest hits')

The best collection of the standard papers that have shaped phil of mind is Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings, ed. David Chalmers (Oxford, 2002; ISBN: 019514581X).

Other good collections are Mind and Cognition, ed. William G. Lycan (Blackwell, 1999; ISBN: 0631205454) and Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology, ed. John Heil (Oxford, 2004; ISBN: 0199253838).

Someone else mentioned Problems in Mind, ed. Jack S. Crumley II (McGraw-Hill, 1999; ISBN: 0767407504). It's good but I don't know that it's still available from the publisher. It includes a really, really, amazingly neat paper by Jerry Fodor that was written for a non-specialist audience: "The mind-body problem" SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN (January, 1981).

Category C -- Guides, Dictionaries, etc.

A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind, ed. Samuel Guttenplan (Blackwell, 1996; ISBN: 0631199969). This book is like an encyclopedia with entries that are typically about four pages in length. It includes self-profiles by Chomsky, Davidson, D. Lewis, Searle and Fodor, among others.

The Blackwell Guide to Philosophy of Mind, ed. Stich and Warfield (Blackwell, 2003; ISBN: 0631217754). This one has 16 new papers by Chalmers, Howard Robinson, Andrew Melnyk, Heil (on mental causation), R. Clarke (on freedom), E. Olson (on personal identity), etc.

Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Mind, Ed. Brian P. McLaughlin and Jonathan Cohen (Wiley, 2007; ISBN: 1405117613). This is an excellent new collection of twenty new papers by leaders in the field. In each section, two authors defend opposing views on some 'going topic'. E.g., one section has 'Externalism and Privileged Access Are Consistent' by Anthony Brueckner followed by 'Externalism and Privileged Access Are Inconsistent' by Michael McKinsey.

Category D -- Books that are closer to CogSci & AI

Mindware: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Cognitive Science by Andy Clark (Oxford, 2000; ISBN: 0195138570). This is a single-author intro.

The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information, ed. Luciano Floridi (Blackwell, 2003; ISBN: 0631229191). Good stuff on connectionism, etc.

Minds, Brains, Computers: An Historical Introduction to the Foundations of Cognitive Science, Robert Harnish (Blackwell, 2001; ISBN: 0631212604).

I have a fuller list of surveys and introductions in philosophy of mind in my on-line book catalogue at LibraryThing: http://www.librarything.com/catalog.php?view=praymont&tag=Phil+of+Mind+Survey

[Simon]

As an undergraduate I found that David Chalmers' edited book 'Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings' to be a great, accessible place to begin for an overview of many of the general concepts present within the field. Especially for someone with little or no background in Phil. of Mind.

[Eric]

For Philosophy of Mind (an area I'm certainly not an expert in), I'm fond of John Heil's Philosophy of Mind: A Guide and Anthology. For a nice introduction, Heil's book for Routledge (Phil Mind: A Contemporary Introduction) is a very good authored guide.

On a different angle, but in that same series, Jose Bermudez's Philosophy of Psychology: A Contemporary Introduction is quite good.

Block, Flanagan, and Guzeldere's The Nature of Consciousness might be a little out of date now (1997) but it does have an amazing collection of consciousness-themed papers.

The Martinich collection on Philosophy of Language (the fifth edition has a 2008 date on it) is a great place to start, but Quine's Word and Object should get a look as well.

[Wes Anderson]

Guide to Philosophy of Mind on SEP:
http://consc.net/guide.html

[Kenny]

Two comments about the above:

1. The Soames volumes are perilous books. While interesting, there are many people who think that Soames badly misinterprets many of his subjects (including misinterpreting Frege as not having existed...) and in the end writes an interesting Kripke hagiography but a bad history of analytic philosophy. If one wants secondary literature on the history of analytic philosophy, it's probably preferable to look at books on the individual philosophers. (I think Goldfarb and Ricketts have a Frege book coming out in the series that Leiter edits, and Peter Hylton just released a very good Quine book in the other Routledge series, so this is a good time for scholarship on the history of analytic philosophy.)

2. That said, I think the irreplaceabley best introduction to the philosophy of language (and is this is especially true for language) is reading the canon itself, viz. the Frege, Russell, Carnap, Quine, Dummett, Geach, Grice, Kripke, Lewis, Stalnaker, Kaplan, etc. etc. Anthologies like Martinich and Ludlow are fine, and introductory texts like Blackburn's are serviceable, but the digestive process that goes into writing such books often excises details and historical context. In a way that is not true of epistemology, metaphysics, and mind, the philosophy of language is inseparable from its role in the history of 20th C philosophy more generally.

[marc moffett]

Some old classics are, in my opinion, the place to start. Russell's The Problems of Philosophy and A. J. Ayer's Lanaguage, Truth and Logic. I would also recommend the first five or so pages of Frege's "On Sense and Reference".

From there I would read at least the first half of Quine's Word and Object and finally, all of Kripke's Naming and Necessity. (I might also suggest Soames' Foundations of Analytic Philosophy as a contemporary commentary.)

Not that many of the other suggestions are great books, but I guess I think that something like the preceding gives someone a sense of the "backbone" of analytic M&E.

[George Wrisley]

Jason Stanley has a good paper, "Philosophy of Language in the Twentieth Century," on his website:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/%7Ejasoncs/RecentPapers.html

About which he writes:

"In this paper, I attempt to summarize philosophy of language in the Twentieth Century. It's a completely absurd task, and I fail miserably. The way I managed to complete the paper I wrote was to write a narrative I thought would be at least helpful for any graduate student in philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, metaphysics, epistemology, and meta-ethics to read."

[Fritz McDonald]

In addition to the good suggestions so far, I would like to put in a plug for:

Quine, From a Logical Point of View
Fodor, The Language of Thought
Lewis, On the Plurality of Worlds

All three are relatively short, relatively accessible books that present the central ideas of influential philosophers.

[MS]

I'm a Continental philosopher with interests in some analytic philosophy. What I used to get a sense of mind and knowledge are, respectively, Chalmer's book and his anthology (paired, it's hard to imagine a better, a more accessible intro to mind), and the Bernecke/Dretske anthology, Knowledge. I also thought Michael Williams' Problems of Knowledge was very good and easy to read.

[Charlie Lassiter]

Perhaps I've missed it, but David Armstrong's book The Mind-Body Problem: an Opinionated Introduction is a good place to start. It's pretty accessible and covers all of the major positions in phil of mind (including Hume's as a variety of dualism), the major problems for a physicalist account (consciousness, qualia, and intentionality), and well as an excerpt of Huxley's text that gives his argument for epiphenomenalism.

[Kris Kemtrup]

I think the best books to start with are those that contain the least technical terms and unexplained 'isms.' Here are a few books I've found to be fairly non-technical:

Mind:
John Heil's Philosophy of Mind: A Contemporary Introduction.
John Searle's The Rediscovery of Mind

Metaphysics:

Armstrong's Truth and Truthmakers,
John Heil's From an Ontological Point of View.

Language: William Lycan's Philosophy of Language: A Contemporary Introduction (From the same Routledge series as the Heil book)

I wouldn't start with an anthology or with pieces of the LEMM canon, e.g. Frege, Quine, Carnap, Dummett, Shoemaker, Fodor, etc. unless you're doing so with a guide.

[Kenny Easwaran]

I agree with others that for language, the Martinich collection is excellent. I haven't looked at the Soames books yet, so I can't say anything about them (unlike the other Kenny above, I suppose).

Also, it looks like people have said plenty about language and mind, and to some extent metaphysics, but not much about epistemology. I suppose here there's a question of how much gettierology one wants to get into, and to what extent one is interested in modal logic and probability. Williamson's "Knowledge and its Limits" is certainly one that a lot of people have been profitably reading, but I'm not sure how much prior LEMMing knowledge it assumes. Also, some of its conclusions are certainly quite far from standard in the literature (though they're becoming more standard).