[ 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: 90 KB, 700x915, EhkvPRxWAAEe08-.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17118889 No.17118889 [Reply] [Original]

Where should someone actually start with philosophy, or can they just start wherever looks interesting and work backwards and forwards from there? Can I just pick up Being and Time, and then read a bunch of other shit foundational to it, and then read it again? The idea of slowly going from the Greeks to the present seems autistic and boring but I'll do it if i have to

>> No.17118914
File: 193 KB, 617x525, 75FD00C1-DDE5-42F6-B910-F61A6F3B2DD4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17118914

>> No.17118934

>>17118914
that dosnt help me :(

>> No.17118952

>>17118889
Plato
Bible
Descartes
Berkeley
Hume(pbuh)
Anything after this is irrelevant.

>> No.17119054

START WITH THE GREEKS, FOLLOW WITH THE ROMANS, END WITH THE HISPANICS —EVERYONE ELSE IS SUPERFLUOUS.

>> No.17119068

>>17118934
Yes, you start with the Greeks
This will rush you through
https://historyofphilosophy.net/

>> No.17119079

> can they just start wherever looks interesting and work backwards and forwards from there
Yes, as long as you are smart and willing to take the time to do it, it’ll lead to healthy exploration, developed intuition and better understanding of philosophy. I haven’t read much “introductory literature” on philosophy, but I’d say Russell’s “The Problem’s of Philosophy” and Laertius’ “ Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers” work.

>>17119054
Ignore this minor schizo/faux-schizo (equally worthless and vain)

>> No.17119080

read the french