/lit/ - Literature

>>9668418
Who is this stinky pinky?

>>9668421
I dunno, but I'm willing to post more in exchange for some advice. I've read too much fiction without a concrete understanding of the ideas espoused by it. Give me knowledge now.

>>9668418
Durant's history of philosophy if you want an overview before settling on something. You can also just get Sophie's World and read only the Arial text, if you want a quicker overview before starting with the Greeks.
Homer's there to understand some references, and not really necessary. The Pre-Socratics come up more in Plato.

Nothing is required. There are people who started straight with Hegel or Descartes and are doing just fine. Pick up whatever interests you, search for their glossaries in the Google to help you along the way.

Try this desu: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic

Pick up the Plato pal.
You don't need to spend much time on the pre-socratics, they're only really historical background to the socratics. Read some Plato and see if you'd like more backstory.
Read Plato.

tarnasposting

This is all shit.

>>9668447
Even worse advice. Likely from an "autodidact"

>>9668463
>meme arrows

free yourself from this mortal coil

OP here.
Starting with Durant's Story of Philosophy for a quick overview.
>>9668714
Nah, I want as much comprehension as possible. I'm a NEET with all the time in the world atm.

>>9668714
>You don't need to spend much time on the pre-socratics, they're only really historical background to the socratics

Confirmed for being an idiot

>>9668771
this book is great so far, should I read the sections toward the end on contemporary european and american philosophers? I've not got too great an interest in them.

>>9668771
>>9668958
Durant is shit, you're doomed to failure.

>>9668995
the fuck am I supposed to read then?

>>9669029

>>9669077
I can't read Durant and Plato?
Fuck your bullshit nigga

>>9668418
All philosophical investigations must begin and end with Being and Time.

>>9668739
>>9668786
>>9668995
So no input from you?

>>9669128
lol you can read The Hardy Boys and Plato if you want, just know that only one of them will teach you anything.

>>9668418
I like the way this organizes it. I'm going through it, but not entirely in order since I'd already been in a intro philo class that glossed over most of this. It's a good time deep into Nietzsche.

>>9669308
"glossed over"

Chopper, sic BALLS

>>9668739
Kierkegaard started straight up with Hegel and did just fine. Descartes and Hume are so self-contained and clear that they can be read easily on their own.

>>9668421
Ai Shinozaki

>>9668418
I thought Russell's "A History of Western Philosophy" was a good overview. Tbh, I skipped over the Middle Ages, though. It seemed like a lot of arguing over whether Jesus had chicken or beef at the last supper and other such inanities.

So after Durant should I start with this?

>>9669308
>Heraclitus and Parmenides after Plato and Aristotle
>No Hesiod or Eurypides.
>Aeschylus after Everyone else.
>No Herodotus or Tucydides.

It's fucking shit.

bump