The Greeks

[Anonymous No.10233052]

I've officially started with the Greeks. Wish me luck you mad bastards.

Pic related is my program, what should I add to it?

[Anonymous No.10233084]

Some oddballs for you. I'm not sure if you're the type that wants to read Greeks to understand what comes after them of if you are interested in Greeks themselves. These suggestions are for the latter.

Aesop's Fables
Bibliotheca of Pseudo-Apollodorus
Lysistrata and Assemblywomen

[Anonymous No.10233092]

>>10233052
Just make sure you touch on Heraclitus and Parmenides before you get to the Socratics.

[Anonymous No.10233100]

>>10233052
Werner Jaeger's
>Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture
Is a good overview to everything once you've read all that and provides the transcendent value of Plato. I started with it, and a lot flew over my head, but it would have been 10/10 had I been thouroghly read in the greeks.

[Anonymous No.10233101]

>>10233092
Are there any particular works or even fragments worth reading by them? My book only has secondary texts on them and other pre socratic philosophers.

[Anonymous No.10233108]

That chart isn't good
Read Ovid Metamorphoses, Iliad and Herodotus instead of a hundred arbitrarily added secondary sources

[Anonymous No.10233132]

>>10233052
Remove secondary shit. Move Hesiod to the top to his rightful place at the top. Replace FAGels Homer translations with Lattimore. Add Aeschylus, Euripides, Aristophanes, and Xenophon
>>10233108
>start with the greeks by reading a 1st century roman

[Anonymous No.10233137]

all greek are jews (literally)

athens = jerusalem

[Anonymous No.10233141]

>>10233084
A little bit of both to be honest.

>>10233092
>>10233100
Noted, thanks

>>10233108
I also have this chart so I thought of mixing them up a bit?

[Anonymous No.10233147]

>>10233132
>>start with the greeks by reading a 1st century roman
Ask me how I know you're a pseud, Metamorphoses is the broadest and most poetic account of Greek myth. let me repeat, Greek myth. It's similar to the Bible. Get the Dryden version for maximum poetics

[Anonymous No.10233158]

>>10233101
Parmenides and Heraclitus have none of their own writings left, but we do have some fragments that were recorded by other contemporaries. http://philoctetes.free.fr/parmenidesunicode.htm and https://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/Philosophy/heraclitus.pdf should be more than good enough.

[Anonymous No.10233660]

Personally I didn't really care for Strauss' Trojan War. Maybe read it much later, if at all. The "Greek epic fragments" is unnecessary for a first time/casual reader; read later if at all. Basically all you need to know is that the Homeric epics are part of a larger "epic cycle," of which only Iliad/Odyssey were written by Homer; everything else is almost entirely lost, and probably wasn't that great to begin with.

Never actually seen anyone read the cambridge companion. If you pick one up, might as well get the companion to greek tragedy instead of the one about greek AND roman drama.

Once you get to Plato pick up a few secondary sources. Cambridge companions to Plato/Plato's Republic, AE Taylor's "Plato the man and his work," relevant 150ish pages in Copleston's "history of philosophy," "bloomsbury companion to Plato" would be the best. Copleston>Bloomsbury>Taylor>C.Companions

Once you get to Aristotle prepare to get fisted. If you read him at all, (a) you probably won't want to actually read the complete works, (b) anything you do read will need to be heavily accompanied by modern criticism. Probably better off buying the cheap modern library "basic works" and even then probably not reading all of it. IMO you shouldn't even think about Aristotle until you finish Plato. At that point you can start deciding what to do. I've been reading Aristotle & accompanying criticism for almost 9 months now and am literally halfway through. Probably not worth the time for a casual reader.

>>10233084
Good advice but I wouldn't recommend Apollodorus at all as he's extremely dry. IMO Hamilton's mythology is a better primer, and Ovid is better for enjoying the myths in more depth.

>>10233092
>>10233101
I am 99% sure the oxford classics "first philosophers" in the OP pic includes fragments of and brief comments on both of them.

>>10233108
DESU not a bad crash course.

>>10233132
Good advice except your Ovid BS

[Anonymous No.10233664]

>>10233158
Parmenides is awesome

[Anonymous No.10233682]

I've read a lot of secondary literature on Plato's work, but none of it was nearly as helpful as the work of John Sallis and Heidegger. Specifically: Being and Logos (JS) and The Soohist (H). There is a lot of bullshit out there.

[Anonymous No.10234751]

>>10233660
Hey, this is a good post. Thanks.
What secondary accompanying criticism have you been reading alongside Aristotle, and how did you decide what criticism to read?

[Anonymous No.10235768]

broke: reading the greeks to understand moderns
woke: reading the moderns to understand the greeks

[Anonymous No.10235822]

>>10235768
good post
>>10233052
OP, don't listen to the morons who tell you "you need to start with the pre-socratics, which I have totally read tee hee xD". Just start reading Plato's Complete Works (find a good translation, not that Jowett trash), read the easy ones first ( Apology, Crito, Phaedo, etc.), and progress to the harder ones. DO NOT READ THE REPUBLIC FIRST.
Do all that and, assuming you have a more or less good knowledge of Greek mythology, you should be set.

[Anonymous No.10235827]

>>10235822
Also

https://plato.stanford.edu -> search for anything you find confusing, I *guarantee* you'll find a better answer there than anything in this shithole.

[Anonymous No.10235961]

>>10235822
What translation would you recommend?

[Anonymous No.10236025]

>>10235961
https://www.amazon.com/Plato-Complete-Works/dp/0872203492

This one is really good, HOWEVER, make sure not to buy the kindle edition, as it is, for some reason, a totally different translation.

Actually, if you want a PDF edition of the book, here's a link: http://s000.tinyupload.com/?file_id=30273821702075210498

[Anonymous No.10236028]

>>10235822
you'd be suprised how relevant the presocratics are

[Anonymous No.10236345]

>tfw you start with the pre-Socratics and now the Earth is made of fire

[Anonymous No.10236953]

These are the real essentials, if you want an actual starting point. The other stuff is good for branching out.

>>10236345
>implying the world isn't made of particles of the four roots orbiting the centre of the universe due to the power of Mind

[Anonymous No.10236977]

Since this is sort of a classics thread: I'm almost finished with Metamorphoses by Ovid. It's been a hard read at times, I think a lot of the stories went over my head but some of the stories were extremely beautifully told. Echo and Narcissus or Actaeon turned into a deer and crying out for his family who was close by while getting torn to shreds by dogs come to mind. Whats everyone elses opinion on it?

[Anonymous No.10237014]

>>10233052
Also started with the Greeks but went with the Alexander Pope translations. Am I fucked? I enjoyed them tho

[Anonymous No.10237021]

>>10237014
Pope is more like an original piece of poetry that adapts the Iliad, not exactly a translation. But it's awesome in its own right.

The translations that usually get recommended here are the Fagles and Lattimore ones. Haven't read Lattimore, but I like Fagles.

[Anonymous No.10237025]

>>10236977
It's great. The best and definitive english version is the one commissioned by Sir Barth I think the name was, but it included Dryden and Pope among numerous other great poets of the period, in composition it was a lot like KJV bible and was made in the same time period as well

[Anonymous No.10237029]

>>10237014
No he is by far the best. Just get a shitty paperback Lattimore to read alongside if you fell lost at anytime. Pope is incredible, he was a manlet prodigy who was writing non-fiction didactic verse at 16

[Anonymous No.10237043]

>>10236953
do you really think The First Philosophers is really necessary? I know sounds a bit arrogant and totally lazy, but could Stanford's presocratics be enough? I've read that and heard the history of philosophy podcast. I know the main ideas of each presocratics, basically.

[Anonymous No.10237103]

>>10237043
In that case, no you don't have to.

I'd recommend reading their fragments though, there's a public domain translation here http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/app/index.htm

[Anonymous No.10237142]

>>10237103
thanks friend. will do

[Anonymous No.10237214]

>>10237014
It sacrifices the quality and integrity of the story for the sake of poetic devices, both in form and structure. Like another anon said, it's good but don't take it as a faithful translation of the original. It's like a different adaptation of the epics.

[Anonymous No.10237268]

>>10237043
Not really necessary. You could also read the first few chapters of Russell's History (inb4 hate) and/or listen to the first couple of episodes of "History of Philosophy Without any Gaps." I would say that's more than enough on the presocratics.

[Anonymous No.10237285]

>>10237268
>"History of Philosophy Without any Gaps."
hey, I did that, see >>10237043
>history of philosophy podcast.
should've been clearer but anyways, I enjoyed it quite a bit. Took notes on each presocratic as I was listenning to focus more. Paused on Socrates though, I want to read plato and aristotle on my own before having someone straight telling me what plato and aristotle said and what they meant by it. I guess I'll continue with the podcast as I go along

[Anonymous No.10237302]

>>10237285
Oh shit sorry, I'm in Europe and 2AM posting again.

If you want to start on socrates without preformed opinion I would just read Apology and Crito, then you can continue listening. They are both short and easy dialogues and after that you'll have a pretty solid understanding of who Socrates was.

[Anonymous No.10237319]

>>10233052
Are you actually learning Ancient Greek? Because there really is no point otherwise.

[Anonymous No.10237334]

>>10237021
>>10237029
>>10237214
Thx anons, glad I read Pope's

[Anonymous No.10237992]

What about Plotinus?

[Anonymous No.10238052]

>>10237992
what about him?

[Anonymous No.10238082]

>>10237992
I don't see him on any of these lists but his explanation of monism was key to my personal understanding of metaphysics. The neoPlatonists were way ahead of the game in regards to fundamental realities that play out favorably in modern physics/field theory/electrical engineering

[Anonymous No.10238127]

>>10235822
the socratics are free mason faggots

[Anonymous No.10238136]

>>10236345
>tfw you accidentally read the very hungry caterpillar as your first book instead of the greeks and now you have irreversible brain damage and unable to obtain the enlightenment of patricianhood.

[Anonymous No.10238145]

>>10235768
huh?