/lit/ - Literature

>>12165472
Mike Cernovich - MAGA Mindset

>>12165472
Need some Seneca and Aurelius.
Enuma Elis
Bible

>>12165472
Resume with the Romans

>>12165495

>>12165472
get approval from the council by writing a synopsis of what you learned

>>12165486
yes this, def seneca

>>12165495
Where do you go from there?

>>12165535
Literature:
http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtbloom.html
Philosophy:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1

>>12165535
Early medieval literature and philosophy. Also, Babylonian and early Arabic poetry and literature.

>>12165535

>>12165592
Edgy

>>12165592

>No Josephus or Bede
>Terrible chart

>>12165472

The Bible, St. Augustine, Kierkegaard, and a willingness to accept Christian faith.

>>12165563
What comes after that, but before Descartes and Shakespeare?

>>12165788
Beowulf, One thousand and one nights, divine comedy, romance of the three kingdoms, Canterbury tales, Aquinas, Machiavelli

>>12165472
Now read them again.

>>12165844
Did you read the Vedas and the Upanishads prior to Homer?

>>12165706
>reading anything by flaming homosexual jack donovan

>>12165480

underrated post

>>12165902
Nope, I also haven't read most of what i listed.

>>12165945
No wonder.
The Romance of Three Kingdoms and Rumi's poems only make sense within their respective historical, geographic, and cultural contexts.
The 1001 Nights is mostly fanciful stories written for the sake of pleasing women, children, and idle-minded men.
It makes very little sense to study any Islamic poetry or Chinese fiction without having read the Quran, Confucius' Doctrine of the Mean, and at least a few books on their respective regions' histories. Despite the meme, starting with the Greeks won't actually give people the universal key to understanding the world, nor should anyone ever attempt to do this. Instead, it would make more sense to first learn the generalities of world history and geography, and to afterwards specialize on a certain region of the world during some time period.
That's what experts do, and I have no reason to believe that permavirgin basement dwelling NEETs here on 4chan shouldn't do the same, even if it's just for the sake of sharing their acquired knowledge with other Anons.

>>12166010
Im reading through anthony kenny history of western philosophy and dk books "big ideas simply explained" series to get a very rudimentary knowledge of most things.

Probably not the best way since its incredibly basic but its how i'm doing it. I just assume most the people who says I've read the greeks are just meme-ing anyways.

End with the Greeks, then start with the Greeks again. Rinse, repeat.

>>12165472
>>12165535
>>12165788
Do you need people to handhold your way through literature?
Literature isn't a trail in which you can just pull out a roadmap.
Think critically, have some interests of your own, and you'll know what to read next.

>>12165563
Any Babylonian or Arabic poetry you would recommend starting with? And is there any worth reading from the Egyptians?

>>12166075
Probably right, I'm a Classics major and I still haven't read all of the official /lit/ Greek prescriptions. Personally I prefer to jump around through history, I want to make sure I have a basic knowledge of all parts of the canon before I commit to getting too in depth in one specific area

I think I know the answer already, but what's the consensus on Stephen Fry's retelling of Ancient Greek myths?

>>12166202
In the case of fiction and poetry, you are right, for the most part, but 'tis not so in the case of philosophy and history, considering the fact that most philosophers will mention concepts that were first thought of by other philosophers hundreds of years before them and assume their reader must already know what they mean.
Likewise, history happens as a process. Well-founded structures (like Imperial Chinese bureaucracy or knights' orders in many European countries) will usually only make sense deep in context, as relics from a far bygone time.

>>12165472
serious question. What happen after you begin reading about philosophy? Does fiction and every other hobby is not amusing anymore?

Is philosophy is the ultimate hobby?

>>12165472
>What now?

find a underage young boy and sodomize him

>>12166525
based Socrates poster

>>12166523
It really all depends on what you are like. If you like to understand reality by the means of categorizations and seek for an ultimate truth, there will be very little in fiction that will be able to appeal to you. You might seek for "correct forms" instead of emotional experiences.
If, on the other hand, you're more of an empathising, emotions-driven person, you're much more likely to find fiction as a place where you can find comfort, or seek to understand other people's feelings.
If you're neither and just enjoy plot for its own sake, you'll probably never stray too far from genre fiction, and philosophy might not really do much for you at all.