/lit/ - Literature

>>12285427
>>12285432
>>12287011

I just, literally just came home from the thrift store where I found and bought the 1st, 2nd & 3rd books in the Sword of Sharanna series. I gave Chapter 1 of the 1st book a read, and I liked it, so I decided to purchase 2 & 3, too. Hopefully I don't regret my decision! And eh, it cost we a total $5 for all 3.

So I'm a sciencefag and Peirce was my first serious adventure in philsophy. How am I supposed to get interested in reading people like kant, Hume, spinoza, Hegel, etc?
I'm already thoroughly convinced that the fragments of Peirce's system are more correct. I can only maintain interest out of a desire to put things in a historical context. I enjoy contemporary philsophy, but I think I may be infected with Peirce's evolutionary triangle fetish. I tried Whitehead, and found his supposedly irreducible catagories to have Peirce's triad at the bottom.
And the linguistic turns in analytic and contential philsophy just seems freaking dumb to someone who has taken the semiotic turn.
What am I to do?
Since I'm already confindent(though not cemented) in my metaphysics, should I focus on science, or continuing developing my own philsophy? If I do the later, do I have to read all those boring philsophers to make my work coherent?

>>11995140
>Bibliography