/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15443567]

What’s the prerequisite reading for understanding this?

[Anonymous No.15443604]

Ending the greeks.

[Anonymous No.15443610]

>>15443567
Descartes, Leibniz, Hume and Plato.

[Anonymous No.15443629]

>>15443610
This plus the categories of Aristotle. It would also be good to read kant’s Prolegomena.

[Anonymous No.15443801]

>>15443567
Literally every single sentence written before it.

[Anonymous No.15443875]

[Anonymous No.15444070]

>>15443567
did you try reading the title?

[Anonymous No.15444121]

Start with the Greeks

[Anonymous No.15444258]

>>15443567
The Hungry, Hungry Caterpillar

[Anonymous No.15444278]

>>15443610
this guide is bullshit lol
always amazes me how much this board's understanding of philosophy is just a patchwork of self-researched wikipedia entries

[Anonymous No.15444292]

>>15444278

Make a better one, anon.

[Anonymous No.15444461]

>>15444292
the second post is much closer >>15443610
>Plato -- Five Dialogues, and the Republic
>Aristotle -- De Anima
>Descartes -- Meditations
>Locke -- Essay Concerning Human Understanding
>Leibniz -- Discorse on Metaphysics, and Monadology
>Berkley -- Three Dialogues
>Hume -- Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
>Kant -- Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics
in that order

[Anonymous No.15444468]

>>15443610
replace plato with aristotle and add rousseau and this is correct

[Anonymous No.15444484]

>>15444461
So basically the post you quoted but more detailed?
Anyway this is nice.

[Anonymous No.15444490]

>>15443610
This, though I imagine you can get away w/o your Plato if you’re a really smart cookie. Also helps to know Newton at least in summary since he prefaces a few of his major counter arguments by standing against him (or his philosophical disciples, rather). If you’re really, really pressed for time Descartes’ Meditations on First Philosophy and Hume’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding should do (though AT LEAST look up Aristotilean/Lockean qualities).

[Anonymous No.15444494]

>>15444461
>prolegomena before cpr
Wanna know how I know you’re a pleb?

>>15444468
>Rousseau
Yeah no.

[Anonymous No.15444514]

>>15444278
>>15444292
>>15444461
>>15444484
shit i guess i'm an idiot -- the comment i quoted (second one in the thread) is actually correct, i agree with

this comment >>15443875 (the guide) is the one i meant to reply to originally -- it's the bullshit one

[Anonymous No.15444516]

>>15443567
T.b.h I read it with no background except a bit of Descartes and two shorter work of Kant that weren't that related to it anyway (Groundwork of Metaphysics of Moral and Idea of History from the cosmological standpoint) and it still made sense.
It will be a lot of work whatever your background, but if you commit to seriously reading it it can mostly be understood on its own.

Of course it's better to have background, but don't sweat it if you haven't followed the guides itt.

[Anonymous No.15444523]

>>15444514
No pbs anon, your guide it still the best itt, that's what matters.

[Anonymous No.15444543]

>>15444494
>prolegomena before cpr
I actually don't think Critique of Pure Reason is entirely necessary, you can substitute it with Prolegomena which is meant to offer a tidier summary of CPR ideas. It's also generally much easier to digest as he essentially walks people through why they were dumb for not understanding CPR in the first place

[Anonymous No.15444586]

>>15443567
25 int
13 faith
You have to 2hand it though

[Anonymous No.15444628]

>>15443567
Basic understanding of the Plato-Aristoteles debate, and a basic understanding of the empiricism-rationalism debate.

Pick up some history of phil. book. That's really all you need.

[Anonymous No.15444931]

>>15444586

[Anonymous No.15445303]

>>15444461
This is the right answer but I'd swap Locke and Leibniz and add Spinoza - Ethics. Also I'm not sure I agree that the Prolegomena is necessary.

[Anonymous No.15446130]

I only read Descartes' method and Hume's Enquiry. For new readers I would recommend the Prolegomena, which is a better summary of what Kant tried to convey in the Critique..