/lit/ - Literature

Is this a good way to approach Wittgenstein?

>>8063767
what about this?

wittgenstein

thats all folks, hope you enjoyed it

Start with Zarathustra.

Also, we should make something like pic related for Nietzsche.

(Nice pic, BTW.)

>>6307571
I made my bachelor degree on Witty and agree with pic related.

>>5379119
>I remember a picture I saved from here, on what ranking you should read Wittgenstein in, I would like something like that.
This?

Pic related is ok, or I would say just have a good general knowledge of Russell and Frege and then start the Tractatus. The latter will be hard work but you'll be fine as long as you take your time and take notes. Don't progress until you understand everything you've read.

>>4978473
I've never read him, but I want to and I've saved this image from a thread long ago, hope it helps.

Here you go, anon.

However, I read the tractatus first and I would urge you to do the same. If you spend enough time with it, until you really absorb what he was trying to do early on it makes reading the investigations all the more fruitful.

As he says himself, his later work is best read with and against his previous work.

>>4632687

Plato, Aristotle, maybe a few of the pre-socratics if you really give that much of a shit

Then you can skip all the way to Descartes. I don't care what anyone says.

Then Hume

Then Kant

Then Schopenhaur

Then Nietzsche

Then pic related

Then whoever you want

you pretty sure'd correctly

Despite this pic I think it's fine to start with the Tractatus if you already have a background in philosophy and you're somewhat smarter than the average bear

>>4566470
>>4566487
>>4566493

>>4544257

>>4521213
Are you crazy?

http://pastebin.com/Ax2C0h7E

This is /tg/'s standard for a stunning story

Critique

Do you concur with pic related as an into?

>>4318104

>>4242120