@Fernando phil,
If one wants to actually learn philosophy, there is generally no better way than to read the original text; it is there that the presentation and arguments for the position or idea is presented in the author's own words. A student of philosophy reads a text from two perspectives, I would suggest:
1. What does the philosopher actually MEAN? This implies a very close---and at least initially sympathetic--- reading of the text, often with the aid of secondary sources and later perspectives.
2. How does the philosopher philosophize? This means, among other things, how does he structure his arguments, how does he employ rhetoric, style, and even paragraphing to make his thinking clear?
A teacher of mine once remarked, not merely in a joking vein, that there are two paragraph and there are three paragraph thinkers. Descartes and Mill were careful about presenting themselves, of painting a picture of themselves to the reader, before they began their strictly philosophical discussions; Plato is well-known for the literary artistry of many of his dialogues, and this had a purpose. Heidegger, especially in his later works or lectures, had a very individual style of beginning very generally, and with each subsequent chapter (or lecture) reviewing the previous one and then meditively deepening the original topic. Aquinas used a very structured methodology of presenting the opposing views in the best light possible, then stating his position, and then refuting each of the opposing arguments one by one.
Learning these different techniques is, I think, an important part of doing and writing philosophy, because it allows a reader to more closely and personally enter into a thoughtful dialogue with the philosopher being read.
