[ 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: 334 KB, 1260x1600, B5114FD1-F01F-454B-AC6F-AD7B933BF432.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18366411 No.18366411 [Reply] [Original]

Are the writings of Descartes the place to start for the early modern period of philosophy?
Or is it Hume?
Or Liebniz?
I want to get to Kant but I need to build up.
I started with the Greeks—Plato and Aristotle.

>> No.18366440

Page 1 is the place to start.

>> No.18366446

>>18366411
Rationalists:
Descartes -> Spinoza -> Leibniz
Empiricists:
Locke -> Berkley -> Hume

Also technically Hobbes, Bacon and John Stuart Mill were empiricists too but you can skip them

>> No.18366580

>>18366411
Descartes is THE philosopher of the 17th century, start with him if you want to learn about modern philosophy

>> No.18366608
File: 16 KB, 316x499, B0C7575C-A414-44C0-B616-D0795255DC3D.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18366608

>>18366446
>>18366580
Basé, merci messieurs.
I have a Hackett edition on Meditations on First Philosophy and Discourse on Method that I shall read.

So is Kant a confluence of Rationalists and Empiricists, is that why you listed those anon?
Would it make more sense to read them in parallel or Rationalists and then Empiricists or One rationalist then one empiricist and repeat?

>> No.18366776

>>18366608

Not anon, but Kant is more like a synthesis of rationalism and empiricism.

>> No.18366837

>>18366608
You can read Locke before Leibniz, as his Essay concerning Human Understanding gets commended on by Leibniz in his Nouveaux Essais

>> No.18366904

>>18366446
I don't recommend skipping Bacon, if anything he marks the beginning of the Early Modern. Novum Organum is Discourse on Method before Descartes.