/lit/ - Literature

File: 22 KB, 300x450, 1286774501748.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Jan 6 10:37:13 2013 No.3327055 [Reply] [Original]

Hi /lit/
I want to get into Continental philosophy, but I understand that I can't just jump into Being and Time. What should I read to get a foothold in the heavyweights of Continental thought--Foucault, Derrida, etc?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 10:52:12 2013 No.3327112 >Derrida >heavyweight

Anonymous Sun Jan 6 10:53:12 2013 No.3327115

>>3327055
>but I understand that I can't just jump into Being and Time

Yeah you can. I'm pretty sure they'll just let you check it out of the library. Unless your nation has some kind of reader ID system that restricts books based on Goodreads profiles or something.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 10:59:13 2013 No.3327132 >>3327115 Oh, okay. My more philosophy minded friends maintained that I would need thorough grounding in German idealism, but if that's not the case, then thank you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:08:12 2013 No.3327147 >>3327132 Philosophy people always think you should read something else before you read that other thing. If you listen to them, you won't get to Heidegger until you're in your 40s.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:19:12 2013 No.3327188 >>3327147 Don't listen to this idiot. You need to have read at least Hegel, and maybe Plato too, before you get into Heidegger.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:21:12 2013 No.3327194 Can someone explain the significance of Alan Sugars head with the caption 'why'? This is the third time I have seen it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:29:12 2013 No.3327217 >>3327188 Why?

Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:30:12 2013 No.3327221

>>3327188

And what do I need to read before Hegel? And what do I need to read before Plato?

Go on, prescribe your list of lifetime study that will never actually be completed by anyone but a philosophy PhD. Maybe. It's what you guys like to do best, I know.

Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:32:12 2013 No.3327223

you don't need much in the way of pre-reqs to read foucault

like he's not the most streamlined read ever but something like discipline and punish or history of madness or a collection of lectures like abnormal you could read without all this "you must read this first" argle-bargle

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:35:12 2013 No.3327230 >>3327188 Don't listen to this idiot. You need to have read at least Kant, and maybe Heraclitus too, before you get into Hegel.

Anonymous Sun Jan 6 11:39:12 2013 No.3327241

Just buy half a dozen short intro books (the Oxford VSI ones are decent) covering the main names, and start from there. If you really must read everything in the original then you can do so afterwards. Original philosophical works are fine if you want to pursue the discipline academically, but are often too tortuous and turgid to be read for pleasure - particularly continental philosophy.

Ignore people who tell you that you must read X or Y beforehand, as it's nearly always bullshit. A few wiki articles will suffice to give context.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jan 7 00:35:12 2013 No.3329689 Listen to the episodes of The Partially Examined Life leading up to Heidegger. In the handful of preceding episodes, they cover a lot of continental stuff that's not only really important but also crucial to understanding Heidegger.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jan 7 13:22:13 2013 No.3331611 File: 19 KB, 261x326, bertrand russell 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Become familiar with Husserlian phenomenology first. Or don't, because Continental "philosophy" is shit. Analytic philosophy>all Pic related

Anonymous Mon Jan 7 13:34:12 2013 No.3331640
File: 1.04 MB, 290x189, iBLrG.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3331611
>Analytic philosophy>all

This is gold. Thanks for the glorious laugh.

Speaking of OP; for the love of god, don't be a fucking bigger idiot than you already are. Most certainly and obligatory, introduce yourself the history of philosophy (a must of all of Plato and Aristotle - I think I speak on behalf of Heidegger here) before attempting to read the Continental canon

Meanwhile, fuck off.

Anonymous Mon Jan 7 17:06:20 2013 No.3332254

My thoughts on the current postmodern names in European philosophy. Take it how you will, I've been told my tastes are weird in the extreme.

Derrida - good luck. He's on another level from me, don't really care about textual deconstruction anyways.

Foucault - mah nigger. One of my favorites Easy enough to jump right into. Read crime and punishment for a sample of his later, (to me) more interesting style. His early stuff is completely different

Deluze & Gutarri: ATP:C&S is my favorite philosophy book of all time. Every fucking paragraph unpacks into the wildest assortment of ideas. Desert Islands is another good book of short essays. Don't really like their stuff on psychoanalysis, though.

Baudrillard - the frosted flakes of modern philosophy. Stays crunchy in milk, not a lot of substance. Entertaining, though

Virilio - good stuff, especially if you like war and politics.

Zizek - I hate Zizek. Arrogant, pompous, self promoting twat without an original thought in his head

For the earlier, deader guys, I'd recommend finding a good graduate level reader or existentialism/continental philosophy. The kind that has a short introductory half chapter summarizing the main points of each persons work, and then 2 or 3 selected readings from each author. Use that to pick and choose.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jan 7 18:08:12 2013 No.3332467 File: 35 KB, 277x400, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3332254 >college level introduction to existentialism This one. Fantastic survey, was the one I used in college, still have a copy.

Anonymous Mon Jan 7 18:48:12 2013 No.3332620

Aristotle. Read the shit out of his Physics and Metaphysics. Descartes is also essential, as this is the dude Heidegger has the most beef with. Hegel isn't needed until half way through the second division, so I'd wait on that. And Husserl. More than anything, you have to be patient. Read everything like four times or until you are comfortable with moving on.

Anonymous Mon Jan 7 18:58:12 2013 No.3332655

>>3327147
No you can start before that, but you have to read some intro books and essays written by other guys that explain him to you if you don't have the training in the history of philosophy.

Secondary literature is necessary for all of great philosophy. Even the ones that you think are pretty straightforward are never straightforward. If you think they are straightforward you are probably missing a big chunk of what they are saying or misunderstanding them.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jan 7 23:20:12 2013 No.3333522 Read Fear and Trenbling and Either/Or, Kierkegaard places the Hegelian dialectic in a more digestible existentialist framework

>>	Anonymous Mon Jan 7 23:34:12 2013 No.3333553 If you want to read Being and Time so badly, just read an intro book on Being and Time and Heidegger's thought.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]