Do you need to study Philosophy formally to be a philosopher

Do you need to study Philosophy formally to be a philosopher?

The title of your thread does not appear to match the body of your thread. If a person wants to BE a philosopher, IMO he needs strong academic grounding in the subject.

The only formal education I've had to philosophy is an introduction to Platonic forms when we read the Analogy of the Cave in freshman religion, as well as references to Aquinas's Five Ways, and a few fallacies of logic. After that, I've had no problem whatsoever picking up the rest on my own. I don't know if this is common, but it hasn't seemed especially difficult to teach it to myself. Look philosophy up online for the basics and then read as much of the original work as you can. The only secret is reading everything you can possibly find.

My major was Business Administration, and my minor was Philosophy. Got better grades in Philosophy, because the subject was so interesting. Take some Philosophy courses; you won't regret it. Take it formally, because Philosophy 101 can be a struggle without the explanations of a good professor. I had to read my first philosophy textbook several times before it started to sink in.

I'm at the point of my life now where I'm picking courses for College/University. I'm not picking any philosophy course because my goal is to go into neuroscience.

My question is, is it better to study philosophy formally, or is it better to study it on your own?

I'm also about to study philosophy at university-level.

However, I talked to a famous Norwegian pholosopher (I'm from Norway btw.) named Tore Frost, who has compiled books that we used in philosphy class at my former school. He said that it would be a smart move to learn a few languages first, like French, German and Latin, as reading the sources in their original languages is very important.

He also told me that much of the philosphy laid in the languages themself, and that it therefore is very difficult to translate directly.

I do not know how common this is in the States, to learn languages first, however I think it is a good advice. I'm studying German atm.

Hang on. You don't have to learn the whole language. You just need to clarify certain translations of individual words. I am opposed to specialism in philosophy.

I believe a more accurate translation is " Thus spoke zarathustra, meaning "this is what and how zarathustra spoke".

The success of the translation is due not only to its eloquence - it manages to translate Kant into the language of Hume - but also the sens that the translation is itself a philsophical event of considerable significance.

Is it off topic? I don't neccesarily think so. As you say translations can have great impact on the material being translated. Therefore, the translator is also contributing to the work he is translating beyond merely translating.

By this reasoning, Nietzche is not entirely Nietzche if you don't read it in german. You're norwegian, chrdani, right? So you know the name Trond Berg Eriksen. The man who has translated a lot of Nietzche's work into norwegian. But in so doing he inevitably added his own understanding of Nietzches words, so reading Nietzche in norwegian is reading Eriksen also.

Ergo, no philosopher has a fully independent theory.

It's as if ideas must be incorporated into a geneology of ideas, and these in turn integrated with a geneology of personality, and then the whole sodding structure called philosophy.

Quote:

It's as if ideas must be incorporated into a geneology of ideas, and these in turn integrated with a geneology of personality, and then the whole sodding structure called philosophy.

I agree. But to answer the initial question about studying philosophy:

If you want to become a scholar in either history, philosophy or even psychology, I feel it is necessary to read primary sources in their respective languages. At least when it comes to languages which are in the same category as those you are already familiar with. German and English are to me natural to master in such a connection. The Latin languages are a bit more complicated to me, such as French, Italian and Spanish.On this issue I can, as I have mentioned, speak of personal experience.

Fortunately, most European languages are relatively easy to master for us who live in the (so-called) "Western World". I know a guy who has studied Japanese for over 4 years at the university, and he can't even read a normal newspaper

I am going to attend a French-course this autumn, and hope I will be able to read the important French philosophers in a two-three-years time.

While it may be a practice for academic philosophy to merge geneologies of personality and ideas, a strict reading of texts to this end is of limited use to the alternative practice of philosophy that tackles ideas on their own terms.

I am thick in this way: When it comes to languages I had 12% for German, 8% for French, and Latin I failed five times. That disqualifies me from studying philosophy with academic finesse. Yet I have a skill which can surpass the best.