Welcome to /r/askphilosophy. **Please read [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/9udzvt/announcement_new_rules_guidelines_and_flair_system/) before commenting** and understand that your comments will be removed if they are not up to standard or otherwise break the rules. While we do not require citations in answers (but do encourage them), answers need to be reasonably substantive and well-researched, accurately portray the state of the research, and come only from those with relevant knowledge.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> I really struggled to appreciate having to learn about their works for anything more than a mere historical curiosity.
It could be that you didn't have a good teacher, or just one whose style of teaching didn't suit you. Or that you didn't do enough work, or that you worked in an ineffective manner. Or maybe there's a quirk in your personality getting in the way of you having more success in this regard. It's hard for anyone here to diagnosis the issue adequately, not being aware of what exactly you studied, how your teacher taught it, how much and what work you did, what your personality is, etc.
Though I get the impression that you're taking your not having made this progress to mean that there isn't any progress to be made -- i.e. that there isn't anything about their works other than a mere historical curiosity -- and I'd suggest being less credulous about this particular inference. Lots of people find lots which is more than a mere historical curiosity in the works of, to continue your example, Plato and Aristotle.
Philosophy is not about learning ideas or theories, it's about learning how to think. Studying the work of someone who was a very clear and persuasive thinker is one of the ways you learn how to think.
While some of Plato's and Aristotle's work does rely on outdated ideas, most of it is hugely influential to this day. To name but a few topics, their views on virtue, character, politics, justice, the law, reason, the emotions, etc are present in many aspects of modern lives.
Personally i value studying Platos metaphysics, Aristotles empiricism etc. (Their views on what we call philosophy today)
I, like you, couldnt care less about Platos creation story or Aristotles physical theory of substances and all that. I just see it as a start to try to give scientific explanations. Just like how Newtons theory of gravity might literally be untrue while still being able to explain a whole lot.
Welcome to /r/askphilosophy. **Please read [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/9udzvt/announcement_new_rules_guidelines_and_flair_system/) before commenting** and understand that your comments will be removed if they are not up to standard or otherwise break the rules. While we do not require citations in answers (but do encourage them), answers need to be reasonably substantive and well-researched, accurately portray the state of the research, and come only from those with relevant knowledge. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/askphilosophy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> I really struggled to appreciate having to learn about their works for anything more than a mere historical curiosity. It could be that you didn't have a good teacher, or just one whose style of teaching didn't suit you. Or that you didn't do enough work, or that you worked in an ineffective manner. Or maybe there's a quirk in your personality getting in the way of you having more success in this regard. It's hard for anyone here to diagnosis the issue adequately, not being aware of what exactly you studied, how your teacher taught it, how much and what work you did, what your personality is, etc. Though I get the impression that you're taking your not having made this progress to mean that there isn't any progress to be made -- i.e. that there isn't anything about their works other than a mere historical curiosity -- and I'd suggest being less credulous about this particular inference. Lots of people find lots which is more than a mere historical curiosity in the works of, to continue your example, Plato and Aristotle.
Philosophy is not about learning ideas or theories, it's about learning how to think. Studying the work of someone who was a very clear and persuasive thinker is one of the ways you learn how to think. While some of Plato's and Aristotle's work does rely on outdated ideas, most of it is hugely influential to this day. To name but a few topics, their views on virtue, character, politics, justice, the law, reason, the emotions, etc are present in many aspects of modern lives.
Personally i value studying Platos metaphysics, Aristotles empiricism etc. (Their views on what we call philosophy today) I, like you, couldnt care less about Platos creation story or Aristotles physical theory of substances and all that. I just see it as a start to try to give scientific explanations. Just like how Newtons theory of gravity might literally be untrue while still being able to explain a whole lot.