/lit/ - Literature

>>15538398
Don't.
Philosophy is a waste of time, do something better with your free time.

>>15538398
I know it's a fat fucking meme, but at least with philosophy you really do have to start with the Greeks. That way you'll have the groundwork done and have the freedom to go pretty much anywhere else that interests you: Stoicism, Rationalism, Imperialism, German Idealism &c. Also I'd personally recommend you'd start with Waterfield's First Philosophers, it basically explains all of the first major thinkers and gives primary sources if there are any that survived, and also will give you a greater understanding of many of Plato's critiques of previous philosophers.

>>15538562
>start with the Greeks

>>15538570
I mean if you want to do it properly then yeh you fucking have to

>>15538570
t. lazy ass nigga

>>15538405
Philosophy is the only thing that is not a waste of time.

>>15538398
Literally only read Nietzsche if you are looking to “seriously” take anything away from what you read. If you want to learn about historical philosophy and its development, then yes start with the Greeks. But just know that 99% of Western philosophy is intellectual masturbation, essentially stoner thoughts.

>>15538622
>I've only read NEETchee

>>15538604
Oh yeah?
Tell what what benefits >philosophy has conferred by now?
Can you actually specify such advantages that philosophy offers?

>>15538658
I’ve read others including the Greeks until I realized it was only for my entertainment, it’s good for pseud points but useless for anything that I would consider that matters. It’s just endless abstractions upon abstractions that make you feel enlightened. Literally studying religion is a better use of time in most cases

>>15538671
Anyone who thinks philosophy matters lives in their head so much that they probably tricked themselves into thinking they are an ascended being or some stupid shit. Why would you care about their rationalizations for their wasted time

>>15538682
What a fucking retarded take lmao.
>I didn't understand anything that I've ever read ergo it's all nonsense :^)

>>15538711
No I understood it all, it just took me a while to understand that is what useless. Maybe you will get there one day :^)

Montesquieu's The Spirit of the Laws

>>15538604
Philosophy and mathematics*

>>15538739
Mathematics is philosophy.

>>15538622
Do tell what you seriously took from neetz, this should be good for a laff

>>15538756
That the ultimate end of all human desire is the affirmation of life. Without afterwordly hopes, all earthly existence becomes empty and meaningless suffering. The purpose is to find a way to affirm life and give it meaning even in light of this. This affirmation is captured when one does not want their life to have been any different but that everything small and insignificant and everything great be exactly as they were. The perfection of life is that you wish nothing about it whatsoever were different.

>>15538398
plato, aristotle, descartes, hume, kant

>>15538727
l'esprit dem tiddies

>>15538580
>t. autodidact pseud whose education is /lit/ charts

>>15538797
>whose education is /lit/ charts

>>15538785
>That the ultimate end of all human desire is the affirmation of life.
What a bunch of meaningless words.
How is this any less of a pointless abstraction than anything that is written in a Platonic Dialouge?
At least Plato is not being shameless about it and is fully aware of it.

>>15538797
right yeh because Plato and Aristotle are nothing more than lit chart memes. Genius.

After getting into the philosophy meme the only 2 I really liked were spinoza and wittgenstein. the rest were at best knowledge to pretend I'm smart and at worse a gigantic waste of time. ymmv

>>15538398
>I want to get into western philosophy

Like there was something called eastern philosophy

>>15539044
>Who is Confucius

>>15539050
Irrelevant, like the rest of ching chong "philosophy"

>>15539059
Based brainlet.

I'd probably just pick up a general textbook on western philosophy and combine it with your own expanded reading.

Think: A Compelling Introduction to Philosophy – Simon Blackburn

Is a good start. It lacks the /lit/ creds, but secondary texts are a better intro to philosophy than just reading Plato for an afternoon.

>>15539065
Tangentially related question: Is it recommended to have a secondary text by your side, when you're reading a primary text?

>>15538398
Start with Descartes - Meditations, Passions of the Soul and the Principles of philosophy.
>>15538562
Plato is deceptively simple, which is why I do not like to recommend him for a first. He requires a trained eye. I mean, Descartes is also deceptively simple, but it is less of an issue.

>>15538398
A textbook on modern logic, followed by Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Hume, Kant, and Wittgenstein in that order.

>>15538671
not to a beast. they don't have the faculty to understand.

>>15540277
Try me.

>>15538398
I’m studying philosophy right now. The textbook I rented out is called Does The Center Hold by Donald Palmer, and I’m learning a lot. You learn all the basics starting from the Greeks. People will tell you that philosophy is bad, but in reality there are just bad philosophers that encourage self destructive thinking.

Avoid any of the following:
>Jean-Jacques Rousseau
>Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
>Friedrich Nietzsche
>William of Occam
>Percy Bysshe Shelley
>Karl Marx
>Henrik Ibsen
>Leo Tolstoy
>Ernest Hemingway
>Bertrand Russell
>Bertolt Brecht
>Jean-Paul Sartre
>Edmund Wilson
>Victor Gollancz
>Lillian Hellman
>Cyril Connolly
>Norman Mailer
>James Baldwin,
>Kenneth Tynan
>Noam Chomsky

>>15540277
>no MOM you wouldn’t GET IT
cringe

>>15542021
what’s wrong with nietzsche

>>15542021
Remove Nietzsche, Shelley, Ibsen, Baldwin (for Giovanni's Room and novels), and Hemingway (for Old Man and the Sea), and remove yourself from /lit/ you twat.

>>15542060
Unironically most people are too stupid to get it

>>15542094
I’m not saying that these guys never produced anything of value, I’m just saying that their philosophical ideologies have impacted the modern world and its denizens negatively. These people have lied, ignored facts, exempted themselves from the rules that they hold everyone else accountable for, and some have been responsible for the modern dictatorships and despots, with hundreds of millions dead.

>>15538671
It's useful for ethics.

>>15542192
what ethical benefits has it provided you

>>15542178
Sartre and Nietzsche have had a positive impact, though.

>>15542202
Not him but he can probably answer the following questions:

What is a good life?

Are there such things as moral duties and obligations that bind us?

Are some moral arguments “better” than others, or are all of them equally valid or invalid?

Are values absolute, or are they relative to time and place?

>>15542021
Half of these aren't even philosophy what the fucking hell is wrong with your retarded brain

>>15542432
He's a phoneposter. Do you really need to ask?

>>15539061
still no philosophy

>>15538604
> cope

>>15542224
each of those questions is utterly useless in any practical consideration.

>>15542584
Quite the opposite.

>>15542593
You're mistaken.

>>15538671
the scientific method is a philosophical method. politics is applied philosophy. ethics is a philosophical subject. psychology is philosophy

what am i missing when i never read original texts and just synopses?

>>15538398
Read philsophical novels at random and start with the platonic dialogues and presocratics if you're genuinely interested.

>>15542615
> scientists seem to do just fine without philosophical training, though.
> the state of politics right now suggests that the philosophical method isn't exactly useful. half the UK conservative party have degrees in politics, philosophy and economics... but they still rely on populism and faux-national pride to win elections.
> psychology has been in the doldrums for decades. linguistics was another field that was overwhelmed by philosophers - it became respectable once it was mathematized.

>>15542658
Do you think it's a coincidence that some of the greatest mathematicians of all time (Descartes, Leibniz, Gödel) were also among the greatest philosohers of all time?

>>15542721
given that the ancient universities had enormous emphasis on philosophy, i would say that they didn't have a choice. they were bound to be influenced by the intellectual trends of their time. but consider that the segmentation of university education into disciplines coincided with a surge in productivity in mathematical research. You could even say that the philosophical focus of the early universities delayed intellectual progress for centuries.

>>15542721
> Leibniz
The man was one of the greatest of all time in like seven fields. He doesn't count.

>>15542658
philosophy is the spring from which all other academic studies originate. it's the creator study. it's not as useful if you're looking to make airplanes, but it's useful for self-knowledge, communicating, peace of mind, being critical, analytical, skeptical, innovative, etc. which are still valuable in their own ways. only NPCs think otherwise

make your future self proud