Heidegger???

[Anonymous No.19216522]

So /lit/, I want to read pic related. I have barely read any philosophy at all. What would I need to read to not get filtered by this? And don't just recommend authors, please give specific books. Like here is what I imagine it would be like, but really I have no idea:

Plato Complete Works
Aristotle Complete Works
Critique of Pure Reason - Kant
Something in-between maybe...
Then maybe some secondary texts...
One of Heidegger own earlier texts?...
Finally arriving at Being and Time?

But really though I haven't read any of these, I'm just blindly throwing darts at the board, but it's just to give an example of what I am looking for.

[Anonymous No.19216533]

You're going to get filtered either way

[Anonymous No.19216596]

Heidegger is mostly a response to Husserl, but highly influenced by classical German idealism.

Read these in this order,
Leibniz's Monadology
Spinoza's Ethics
Kant's Critique of Pure Reason
Fichte's early works, then Wissenschaftslehre
Schelling's Freedom Essay
Brentano's Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint
Frege's Foundations of Arithmetic
Bergson's Time & Free Will / Matter and Memory
Husserl's Logical Investigations
Husserl's Ideen (Vol I only, get Hackett)

and then finally, Heidegger's Being and Time

this is just the minimum requirement to get everything out of it that you could, you may get filtered without having more prereqs and also you may be able to skip straight to whatever if you are high IQ enough

[Anonymous No.19216640]

>>19216596
god that chart is terrible
>>19216522
just do the aristotle complete works
also learn german

[Anonymous No.19216687]

>>19216522
start with the greeks

[Anonymous No.19216715]

>>19216522
>Plato Complete Works
Not really needed, better read Coplestone or Windelband, something to introduce you how Plato came to the ideas, and to understand Diels fragments on the early Greeks, Heidegger starting idea is the need to return to the presocratics and you skipped them completely
>Aristotle Complete Works
not needed, especially his biology and zoology stuff, only read Metaphysics and Physics and even that most likely will all fly over your head, since every sentence has to be analyzed and understood multiple times.
It would be better to pick up some scholastic metaphysics, something about Thomas Aquinas since they a) summarise Aristotle b)Include Avicenna and Islamic commentaries c) Include the Neoplatonists and their commentaries
>Critique of Pure Reason - Kant
Read Berkeley before that, you kinda want to understand his immaterialist position, something Aquinas is good for since he's a realist and goes over the nominalist-realist debate

>Then maybe some secondary texts.
You skipped Husserl, his mentor. And also Brentano, Husserls mentor. Brentano was also the first philosopher Heidegger read, so you should, at last, familiarise yourself with intentionality and phenomenology

Now, if you are more interested in his existentialism, you should read Kierkegaard
If youre more interested into his metaphysics, read Leibniz, Fichte, Hegel (especially when it comes to Time, also if you want to get into Heideggers concept of Time more, read Plotinus)

[Anonymous No.19216726]

>>19216522
>I have barely read any philosophy at all. What would I need to read to not get filtered by this?
People with graduate degrees in philosophy get filtered by it.
Don't waste your time.

[Anonymous No.19216787]

>>19216640
> god that chart is terrible
Doesn't suit you =/= terrible
You bitch

[Anonymous No.19216788]

Descartes Meditations & Method

[Anonymous No.19216789]

>>19216715
To add more
When it comes to Plato, a lot of people just read the dialogues and all they get is "How so its just two guys talking and one guy is a hypocrite and the other guy is ironic", completely missing the point. That's why sometimes is better to read some "History of philosophy" (Do not read Russels History of Western Philosophy, its is the worst possible history of philosophy since he misinterprets a bunch of points, shits all over, and doesn't even try to understand ancient authors, read Coplestone and Windelband)

When it comes to Aquinas and Aristotle, you obviously also need to them for Kant. What you dont need, in my opinion, for Kant is to actually read Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Hume and Locke, its more important to understand their conflict and why none of them could solve certain problems/how it was possible that certain problems had two equally reasonable but completely different solutions
Thats why Kant is important, but yea you dont need to read all 3 critiques, just the first one
After reading Kant you enter more or less the german philosophical tradition, it is important to understand that Heidegger is one of many thinkers in a long line, he builds on the knowledge of thinkers before him that started with Martin Luther, towards Kant, Fichte, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Brentano, Scheler, Dithey etc.

Heidegger is a great thinker, he wrote a lot about a lot of themes, from Man and Machine to Art, I'm currently writing my masters on Heidegger and most likely also doctorate if I'm lucky; for me at least his work is like a crown piece, everything that I read and studied before unites now. After conquering Heidegger, I still have a lot of thinkers to read and understand, have fun with philosophy lad

[Anonymous No.19216799]

>>19216522
>Plato Complete works
meme. Read the first four (euthyphro, crito, apology, phaedo), theaetetus, protagoras, meno, timaeus, and you don't need much else
>Aristotle complete works
meme. just read the organon.
>Critique of Pure Reason
yes, but read at least descartes first

I am saying all of this with no knowledge of heidegger though since he's not my thing so. others will say obviously that you need to read nietzsche and hegel for him.

[Anonymous No.19216815]

>>19216596
>just read leibniz's monadology with no context bro
meme. You are better off reading Theodicy and The New System, then the Monadology as a bonus

[Anonymous No.19216830]

>>19216815
also his dialogue, new essays on human understanding, all of these are better to read than just the monadology out of the blue.

[Anonymous No.19216912]

>>19216522
Just read secondaries you dumb bitch. Every single book mentioned in this thread is hard. You will retain none of the knowledge, or you will waste months getting through some faggot's schizo scribbles before you even get to the book you're actually interested in. The secondary will give you a modern explanation, historical context, and citations for further reading. Don't listen to high schoolers on 4chan giving you memeguides, read the works of academics that actually know the subject.

[Anonymous No.19216934]

>>19216815
>>19216830
I mean, New Essays is objectively a better work, but the majority of Leibniz's core ideas are in the Monadology and it's like 20 pages long

[Anonymous No.19216998]

>>19216912
Well fuck you I didn't know that. I don't read philosophy so I don't read secondary texts you dumb faggot. However thank you for the good advice. Can you recommend a good secondary text to his work? It's a bonus if I can get it off Amazon.

[Anonymous No.19217026]

Also
>tfw you realize that you might not be able to read the books you want

[Anonymous No.19217044]

On the very first page of Being and Time he says that he intends to examine a question that he thinks all philosophers since Plato have neglected. Most of the book does not refer to previous philosophers. The sections where he does do not require prior familiarity to get the gist of. Thinking you need to go through the canon of Western philosophy to understand Heidegger is not only a fool's errand -- it is against the spirit of the book.
The only thing that you need is to be able to think philosophically. That is not going to be taught to you in any book but reading some classic philosophy of literally any kind can help. So take your pick from what interests you. If you absolutely need a specific book to try Aristotle's Metaphysics and Physics would be most relevant.
If you find yourself stuck and frustrated with understanding Heidegger's own thinking (which will happen almost immediately) then any number of secondary works including the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article can help. Hubert Dreyfus is a pretty clear and approachable Heidegger scholar.

[Anonymous No.19217065]

>>19217044
And since you asked for specific titles I would go with this one.

[Anonymous No.19217098]

>>19217065
Thanks anon, thread solved, I'm gonna get this and start reading it

[Anonymous No.19217803]

>>19217098
>reading Sein und Zeit in translation
whats the point?

[Anonymous No.19218835]

>>19217803
I dont have the time or energy to learn German. Or rather, I do have enough time to get it done eventually, but what little time I do have, I would rather spend actually reading books. I already know three languages. This is enough for me. Why would I spend so much time, possibly hundreds or thousands of hours, to learn a fourth, when I dont really want to, and I could spend that time reading books in my three other languages, or doing something else I actually enjoy?

[Anonymous No.19218857]

>>19218835
>english speaker
>knows 3 languages
>"waah german is too hard"

[Anonymous No.19219069]

>>19216522
Plato, Husserl, Heidegger

Or, just study Being and Time directly. People make this out to be some "huge" endeavour, but there's plenty of secondary lit to work through, without the need to dig deep into his predecessors.
You don't need to work through books--academic articles and the Stanford Encyclopedia entry are decent places to start as well.
Being and Time is actually somewhat accessible enough to jump into straight and go from there, but having a look at Heidegger's other writings and lectures ("What is Metaphysics", for example) might also be a good idea.

A better question to ask is: why do you want to read Heidegger? Is it because the German continentalists interest you, or is it because you want to get into philosophy of metaphysics in general and don't know where to start? Heidegger is probably not the best place to start, by the way.

Please let me know OP. I am pretty bored, and I do want to help you.

[Anonymous No.19219587]

>>19218835
>doesn’t want to waste time
>wastes time reading Heidegger in translation
huh?

[Anonymous No.19219740]

>>19218857
>>19219587
You fucking niggers know that by the time you have studied German enough to read Heidegger you will have put in hundreds if not thousands of hours right?
And then what? Finally read Sein und Zeit only to not get anything at all again?
Read a good secondary text that opens up a few of the relevant topics on language and how sein, dasein, in-der-welt-sein, Anon-sein-schwuler-Faden differentiate and then get on with with.

[Anonymous No.19220892]

>>19216715
What would help with Aristotle then? If it supposed to fly over my head. Any secondary lit that could help?