/lit/ - Literature

>I haven't read any other "philosophical" book but Thus Spoke Zarathustra
Good lord, read literally any other philosophical book for the sake of all that is good.

you probably didn't even get the meaning of the first paragraph of the prologue.

>>11148462
I think you would do well to read a few other books. Don't go listening to the buzz of flies. Most of all you should begin applying what you know to your own life.

Nietzsche shoud be banned from juveniles or complete humanities noobs christ

How can you form a well-informed philosophy for yourself if you've only earnestly exposed yourself to one perspective? You'd be volunteering yourself to philosophical tunnel-vision, which is antithetical to the entire pursuit of philosophy.

>>11148555
Who were the presocratics reading to develop their philosophies?

>>11148565
I understand your point, but to assume you should ignore thousands of years of inquiry in forming a philosophy is arrogant and unnecessary. You'd be better served by exposing yourself to the well-developed perspectives of the great philosophers before making that call. Like the expression about learning the rule book before throwing it out

>>11148565
Presocratics had teachers and probably debated ideas with others

>>11148588
I honestly believe all one needs to develop a rigourous personal philosophy is serious study of propositional logic, an attention to nature (in a direct, empircal observational sense) and perhaps an innate sensitivity to the concerns of mankind (but this is debatable).

>>11148555
>>11148588
But what if this one book somehow manages to crystallize all that is important in philosophy, maybe i do not require anything else. I do not need to understand how certain thoughts came to be, i do not need to see their roots, leave that to historians, i just need the thought and its explanation.

A foolish expectation that one book could compass it all obviously, but not impossible.

You could read Nietzsche every day of your life and not grasp a single sentence of meaning. You gotta read as much as you can man.

>>11148603
>develop a rigourous personal philosophy

Oh I agree 1000%. You'd be light years beyond the majority of people if you lived with this sort of openness and intellectual sensitivity. My point is more that it almost never hurts to accrue more knowledge to consider. It could only serve to enrich your already developed perspective. Although there are obviously diminishing returns

>>11148613
Diminishing returns yes and of course intellectual gatekeeping which has created a stagnant and mercenary academia.

>>11148607
>maybe i do not require anything else

Well, you don't require any of it to begin with, philosophy is a bit of a leisure pursuit. So if you're gonna engage with it out of a genuine love for it, or even for its utility, you might as well be rigorous in your study. But yeah, if there was such a book that could encompass all the ideas that philosophy considers, I see no reason you'd need to read anything else. But there's no such book.

>>11148621
You could make the same claims regarding almost any mature field. As the body of cannonized work becomes larger and larger, so does the demand on its scholars. That's why the field has become specialized, same as medecine or chemistry. It's a sad state of affairs, but there's not really an easy way around it. But of course that's only the case in academia, the demands on individuals are nowhere near as crushing.

>>11148642
Even though I don't like everything it has to say, the School of Life youtube channel is I hope doing some good work in promoting philosophy as a component of lifestyle; the demands of life are the same for a construction worker as they are on a professor, so why should knowledge privilege the professor, and other "initiates" ? Really just asking rhetorically; it just pains me to see it when someone is inspired by a book and so many rush in to tell him he has misunderstood it.

Read Walden when I was 13 and everything since has been mere commentary and mostly superflous (with an exception for Rimbaud, who has also been a lifelong inspiration to me)

>>11148462
What a great cover picture!

>>11148666
>School of Life youtube channel
hmm seems pretty alright so far

>>11148666

I find they misinterpret sometimes, which can be frustrating. But as you say, their broader and more important role is making people live to philosophical issues in their lives. It puts people in a better position to accept or dismiss interpretations on their own, and that's where we want everyone to be. We should encourage readings, but I think it's also important to encourage discussion. I can't count the number of times that I was convinced of my reading of a text then got my rhetorical ass beaten the moment I expressed my view to a room of smart people. And not in an aggressive way, just having issues I'd never considered brought to my attention.

>>11148462
Same journey OP, I'd say read it again and again and again. It's a wonderful book. My cover fell off though.

>>11148723
It is not easy to promote discussion outside of niche places like this site or in classes themselves which again does not much for most people. I really wish there was something i could personally do to help this along. I bring up philosophic questions at work (i am a pipe fitter) but people just think i am weird or a stoner.

>>11148729
I'm thinking about reading it again at some point, some parts i had to read twice to understand, i wonder what i might have missed.

>>11148565
egyptian mystics, I swear.

>>11148753
That is an intriguing and plausible answer. Has anything survived from the Egyptian or Eleusinian mysteries? Not asking for crowley or other masonic bullshit.

>>11148743
>but people just think i am weird or a stoner

I had the same problem back when I was a janitor. I mean the other guys and gals I worked with were stoners anyway, but they seemed to think I was taking it to a different level of stonerhood. I think encouraging actual discussion of meaningful subjects would have to involve friend groups of people willing to take part in these discussions, which is hard as hell to find outside of university life or lifelong friends/loves.

>>11148763
>Eleusinian mysteries

Don't know about Egyptians but I know for a fact that we know practically nothing of the Mysteries. They're very mysterious. Early Christian scholars of Greece seemed to describe them as profane and lewd, but that's almost certainly a case of religious bias against non-christian ceremonial practices.

>>11148769
>friends
Aye, there's the rub

>>11148779
Things like this actually make me angry. Why is time a devouring worm?

>>11148744
It's more about bonding with the book.

>>11148782
When it comes to the Mysteries the reasons were numerous. They were secret, and exposing those secrets to a non-initiate would result in permanent exile (unless you're Alcibiades but he was special). So naturally not many people talked about them and even fewer wrote it down. So the only written accounts you'd get would be from outsiders who didn't fear national reprisals. Any personal written accounts haven't survived. It's all very strange considering the amount of time the Mysteries were practiced (over a thousand years). They might have involved a hallucinogenic tea, which is fascinating to consider.

>>11148811
Was it like an ancient Coachella?

>>11148799
>bonding with the book
isn't that just another way to put it? to get to know it more deeply is basically my meaning, i guess it's kinda different but not completely, doesn't bonding go hand in hand with knowing the other better?

>>11148814
>Was it like an ancient Coachella?

By some accounts literally yes

>>11148555
who cares about this shit trips post, keep ur reading pure, carry around 1 text of zarathustra with you everywhere you go, reread it. read it backwards. highlight your favorite chapters and memorize them, only then will you have a chance at the overman

>>11148820
Sure, to make it part of you. A single, second or even tertiary reading is only a beginning. This book is not like the others. It's about the non-verbal effects.

>>11148869
based digits, such is a holy post

>>11148869
Man is not the overman, lad. Rejoice in being a bridge.

>>11148876
This. Make your life a going down. Revel in your time.

What is philosophy and where do I get started with it? I usually see the response "start with the greeks" but is there a more specific answer?

If you want to use philosophy as a way to understand the world, read Kant, Wittgenstein, Spinoza, etc.

If you desire to understand philosophy itself, read Hegel.

>>11148876
>>11148880
shut up nerds reread the book in german

>>11148462
Read it again and some other Nietzsche. Nietzsche is based and good practically as far as philosophy goes. If you read too much you will become a faggot who is unable to seriously believe in anything and unable to apply anything to your life.

>>11148898
search up the ideas thinkers you hear about and seem interesting.
look up their influences and have a base understanding on them and then just jump into one of their works. there is a shitload of lectures you can find and secondary literature to help you. start with the greeks is a meme.

Theres just so many fucking newfags here. I suppose it is summer, but fuck is it bad

>>11148898
Plato

>>11148462
You're being dogmatic in your approach to philosophy and thus unphilosophical. The book won't guide your 'philosophical thought' because -you- have no thoughts, you borrow the thoughts of an author as your own, as truth itself.

>>11148994
man it's so fucking hot out there, i can't take it, makes me wanna shitpost

>>11148462
>keep myself "philosophically pure" allowing only one book to strongly guide my philosophical thought
>said literally no philosopher who ever lived ever

This provides a good starting point.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1

>>11148539
>tfw you slowly become aware that the modernist projects of liberalism and Bolshevism were tacitly rebellions against checks on accessing esoteric knowledge and are best represented by the Sith rather than the Jedi with whom autistic faggots identify

Seriously though we need to have a society of professional archivists. Some knowledge is often enough to get you or others killed without actually offering any other utility - see: OP.

>>11148565
Not only did they certainly read other works (Heraclitus shit all over the other presocratics) but they were contradictory, unpolished, enigmatic; they were anything but what passes for serious philosophy post-Plato. If you want to go sit in a room for 20 years to figure out that A=A you can do that, it wont really do much but occupy your time though.

>>11149080
this is the opposite of philosophically pure. Op is so fucking stupid and we have these threads everyday now.
>I havent read the Greeks let alone any philosophy but here's what I think of accelerationism
God just shut the fuck up what happened to 4chan being elitist. Its all just fucking newfags fuck off and die

>>11148462
OP Neitzsche was a philologist he read literally fucking everything; don't be retarded.

>>11149130
Well then if he read everything why should i do the same instead of just reading him?

>>11149130
is this even real?
Wow nicia actually had a bigger dick and was taller then rée, but lou seems to be still more interested in rée.
Both dyels.