[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 129 KB, 450x400, 7d3zSN.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11035154 No.11035154 [Reply] [Original]

Is there an order to read Kant, Nietzsche, or Schopenhauer? also did they get any ideas from the Greeks or any previous philosophers?

>> No.11035164

>>11035154
Kant, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche; yes.

>> No.11035168

>>11035164
You have that backwards

>> No.11035171

>>11035164
You forgot Sweden.

>> No.11035184

>>11035164
you've read them? is there anyone to read before them? are they hard reads?

>> No.11035210

>>11035184
>you've read them?
yes
>is there anyone to read before them?
nope
>are they hard reads?
i not really

>> No.11035232
File: 5 KB, 250x233, 1521958013390s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11035232

>>11035184
Did the philosophy degree meme so yeah I've read a lot of Kant and Nietzsche, and admittedly not enough Schopenhauer. Nietzsche and Schopenhauer are both very fun reads. They are spirited polemical authors. Kant is a lot of careful work to get through, but presents the "best" philosophy of the three. If you really want to do things right with philosophy you unironically start with the Greeks. Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Descartes, Spinoza, Hume; would probably be the best route to Kant, but it's not necessary. Don't be afraid of referring to secondary lit if you get stuck, just use it like a crutch to make it through the primary.

>> No.11035393

Kant's critique of pure reason is an answer to Hume. So ignore >>11035210
this moron.

>> No.11036096

>>11035232
What do I read of Augustine's other than Confessiones and De civitate Dei and why?

>> No.11036103

>>11035184
>is there anyone to read before them?
the greeks

>> No.11036120

>>11035154
>Kant
Somewhat standalone. Just read the translator's preface.
>Schopenhauer
Kant.
>Nietzsche
Boy you fucked.

>> No.11036825

>>11036120
who came first out of the 3?, i'd like to read them in "order" in which they lived.

>> No.11036838

>>11035154
Kant->Schoppy->Neetchan

>> No.11036860

>>11036825
Kant came first, but Nietzsche will be useless to you if you lack a wide acquaintance with Western literature and philosophy. His ideas are accessible with the right secondary literature, but he writes in response to so many specific writers that if you read Nietzsche unprepared, you'll miss a lot. This is because Nietzsche has a very critical mind--his style is almost completely negative, except in Zarathustra. He still stands as one of the greatest critics in human history, but to get that, you need to know what he's criticizing. But reading Kant and Schopenhauer will give you the general thrust of his biggest critiques against German philosophy, idealism, and asceticism. Good luck.

>> No.11036865
File: 15 KB, 220x293, 220px-Marine_Le_Pen_(2017-03-24)_01_cropped.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11036865

>>11035154
>Is there an order to read Kant, Nietzsche, or Schopenhauer?

It is very advisable to read Kant before Schopenhauer and reading Schopenhauer before Nietzsche wouldn't hurt.

>also did they get any ideas from the Greeks or any previous philosophers?

Kant was mainly influenced by Wolff, Leibniz, Spinoza, Descartes, Locke, Berkeley, Hume and less so by Aristotle.

Schopenhauer took mostly from Indian philosophers.

Nietzsche was extremely influenced by the Greek philosophical canon.