/lit/ - Literature

>>19765581
Literally Plato. The first one. The one they all say you should read first. It's even in dialogue form for retards like you. It's literally written like those comics you see where only the author seems smart as to prove his point. Can frog posters ever fucking GOOGLE ANYTHING GOD DAMN FUCKING FROG POSTERS YOU UNDERAGE PIECE OF SHIT. I USED TO BE A PIECE OF SHIT BUT IM NOT ANYMORE WE USED TO JUST DOUCE THOSE BABIES IN WATER AND SLOP EM UP. YOU CANT STOP ME FROM ORDERING A GLASS OF WATER WITH MY STEAK.

>>19765608
Thanks schizo

>>19765608
i thought it was a joke? i should fr read those niggas? then what

>>19765608
>not starting with the pre socratics
ngmi

>>19765581
These are sufficient for me.

>>19765931
Thanks butterfly bro.

>>19765691
THEN FUCKING ARISTOTLE YOU IDIOT. GOD DAMN KIDS WONT SLOP THEIR STEAK OR EVEN READ THE FUCKING WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE BEFORE ASKING QUESTIONS

>>19766087
ok then where is it

>>19765581
Read the myth of sisyphus

A book on Classical Rhetoric/Logic. Learn how to construct an analyse basic syllogism. Watch videos if that is more your speed but take notes and practice forming you own, take note of disagreements you see online or IRL and try to locate the premise, see if the argument follows or if the criticism addresses it.

Then read Plato's dialogues. Then Aristotle.

It is good to start with the Greeks, but it pays to remember that the Dialogues of Plato, and the writings of Aristotle, were intended to accompany instruction from a mentor in the Academy or Lyceum. They were never meant to be standalone, to be read without guidance. So go watch lectures on topics that interest you or you find hard to grasp, or find books that deal with them, or just ask around.

With this (knowledge of classical syllogism) you will have the base to handle anything between The Greeks and Kant, even some stuff after Kant that isn't strictly Post-Kantian.

>>19765581
I believe you are looking for this little frogler

>>19766178
>>17557914

>>19765581
Skip the Greeks and start with the Pajeets. Read the Bhagavad Gita first, then you read the Upanishads. Then you read it all over again but with different commentaries by spiritual leaders/teachers from the different Vedantic schools.
When you have done all of that, you can start studying Trika Shaivism which is the absolute crown jewel of all metaphysics and philosophy, the truth.

1. start with the greeks
2. then move on to the Christians
3. then move on to the modernists
4. then the post modernists

>>19765581
No cap bruh I fr think you shouldn't bother

>>19765581
While "starting with the greeks" is always a good advice, if you are a complete beginner i would suggest reading some general introduction to philosophy
Try to take a look at the suggested biography for first graded in philosophy courses in your country's colleges. Usually it's good beginners stuff
Then once you have a basic knowledge of what philosophy is, start with the greeks. Especially Plato and his Apology of Socrates

>>19765581
Start with Descartes and read the SEP pages on Thomism and Aristotelianism, so you can appreciate how hard these schools get BTFO. Then read Locke, Berkeley, and Hume. There, you finished philosophy.

This is all really good advice. Thanks everyone.

>>19765581
platonic dialogues

>>19765581
Entry-level philosophy textbook -> Plato (chart on wiki) -> Aristotle
That'll take you a while.
Alongside this, you should read general overviews of specific area's of philosophy to see what interests you.
Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is a good resource for this.
I can also recommend the podcast "history of philosophy without any gaps" for short introductions to various philosophers. He has some great episodes on Plato which you could listen to after reading the dialogues which they concern. Pre-Socratics are fun but not essential to know inside out.