[weichi]

Most of the comments here are completely missing the point of the article.

The article is not about whether the ideas espoused by old philosophers are worth learning about, or about whether old philosophers are worth reading. The article asks the question of why philosophers prefer to read the original works of old philosophers, instead of reading descriptions of these ideas by authors who have demonstrated competence is explaining philosophical ideas. Which is the way that education is handled in most (all?) scientific fields.

[westoncb]

Interesting. I was just writing about this yesterday:

If the book's ideas were of lasting consequence, it's a near certainty that more clear statements of them have been produced in the intervening years. You may lose some of the aesthetics of the original—but often times the true aesthetic value is debatable (or at least relative), and if it's truly there it still may not be worth losing the increased clarity and further refinement of ideas found in later works.

[Senderman]

I have to disagree with the author of that paragraph. Concepts usually get diluted as they pass from person to person, not more clear. They also mention there is often times a "debatable" aesthetic value - to me, that's all the more reason to at least look at the original work and make your own interpretation.

[AgentME]

Sometimes it's useful to see the original version of an idea: it can be easier to see what line of thought led to it, and what necessity the idea addressed. Further refinements may improve the idea, but obscure the source and original context of the idea, which might make it harder to fully understand or appreciate.

[ianai]

I know I understand best what a philosopher says when I no longer feel as though I were reading and instead feel like s/he is talking to me through the pages. I would liken understanding a technical concept to being able to reproduce what another person did. Understanding a philosopher requires something like building up their worldview from their words. I’d liken it to being able to reproduce what the person thought and did.

[AbrahamParangi]

There are other fields where the former approach is taken over the latter— such as painting, sculpture, literature and other kinds of art.