/lit/ - Literature

*worth

It's not, really. Modern philosophy basically began all over again with Gottlob Frege.

>>6309566
This. OP, just start with Frege, Russell and Moore, then move on to the Plato and Aristotle of our time, Wittgenstein and Kripke.

>>6309561

Some may disagree with me, but Kant is really important for anti-realist and constructionist theories of knowledge that still persist to this day. I will give you the suggestion my advisor gave me, start with the last third of the book, and then start with the beginning. It's less tedious if you know why he is going for what he is going for, which he explains in the later part of the book. Kant is insanely important, Kant begins what becomes the chain from Fichte to Nietzsche, and then Heideggar and leading into contemporary Continental Philosophy, though he had a major impact on Analytic Philosophy as well. Anyone who tells you he isn't worth reading does'nt know what they are talking about.

Kant was revolutionary thinker even if much of his thought was very problematic. If you are a realist in any sense, then Kant( or those who carry on aspects of his work) is the boogeyman you have to face if you want to claim you are worth anything as a modern Philosopher.

>>6309581

Also, any time you see a towering historical figure in Philosophy, the answer to "should I read him" is always "yes".

>>6309581
>though he had a major impact on Analytic Philosophy as well. Anyone who tells you he isn't worth reading does'nt know what they are talking about.
Fuck off. He added nothing. Hume was a great pre-analytic. Kant never made a single great discovery.

>>6309578
>>6309566
Ignore these people op, listen to >>6309581

>>6309581

Eh, I guess, but his ethics seem so plainly wrong as to be dismissable without a debate. No, morality at the cost of the world is not imperative on anyone, it's insane.

>>6309584
>'Yu cannot know nuffin'
>great pre-analytic

>>6309586
Don't listen to the continental, OP, they can't critically examine a philosopher. Just as Kant warned us of those who take the word of the ancients as gospel, these continental charlatans take the word of German idealists as gospel.

>>6309589
>I don't know why scepticism is important
GTFO or get BTFO.

>>6309561
At least read Descartes (Meditations) and Hume (Book I of the Treatise and the Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding) first.

>>6309594
why

>>6309566
>>6309578

>>6309561
NOBODY on this board has read and understood Critique of Pure Reason.

NOBODY
/thread

>>6309588

Just realize that there are tons of Philosophers with far more experience in the field, who are smarter than anyone on this board, who think his ethics are worth developing. I agree with your prescription personally, but I doubt either of us have sufficiently studied Kant to make that a final judgement.

>>6309590
> I'm a continental now

No actually, I'm quite anti-continental for the most part. But I realize that If i'm going to dismiss something I should actually read it and be able to make compelling arguments against it, instead of just shit posting about it.

>>6309622
Because Kant builds on top of those two authors a lot of his theory, and writes assuming you are well read on both of them (as were his peers at the time) so he'll take for granted some explanations or concepts.

>>6310781
It's not that hard, Sellars reiterated all the relevant parts anyhow via the myth of the given.

Is the Penguin version of Critique of Pure Reason alright too read or are there better versions out there?

>>6309584
is this actually a joke? i struggle to believe this post

>>6309561
Of course it's worth reading. This translation is an older one, but still a classic. I consult both the Cambridge edition as well as this one.

It's difficult to read, so make sure to devote your time and a full notebook to it. I read it first during the summer between high school and college, then read it again for a university course devoted to it. I'm still reading and re-reading it.

The best background reading is Kant's groundwork. That short little work by Hume is useful too, but less so I think.

If all you read is German Idealist philosophy, you will have essentially understood all other philosophy. Kant is the beginning. Hegel is the end.

>>6311070
it's a meme-post friend. people like to repeat it for the sake of repeating it

>>6309581
I need to read something before reading Kant?
Some guy told me than I had to read Plato's Phaedo and Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics.

Anyway, thank you for the recommendation

ITT analytic faggots with their heads so deep inside their buttholes they could'nt recognize a major philosopher if he taught them in person.

>>6311018
Cambridge or nothing

>is this super important influential philosopher worth reading
Yes
Go away, if you want to get into philosophy then do the hard work, if not continue reading novels