[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 338 KB, 1238x830, athens.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14738391 No.14738391 [Reply] [Original]

> Plato- works

> Aristotle- organon, metaphysics, physics, politics, nicomachean ethics, de anima, poetics, rhetoric

> greek and medieval commentaries on plato/aristotle (averroes, aquinas, proclus, farabi, avicenna)

> Aquinas- compendium of theology

> Augustine- City of God, Confessions

what do you think? is this do-able by the start of the fall semester? I have a full class schedule till may then about a month off before I take 3 summer classes.

>> No.14738433

>>14738391
should also say I don't intend to read the full body of commentaries produced by those authors, those are just examples of the types of authors I'd be reading. realistically I'd probably only get to a couple

>> No.14738526
File: 61 KB, 569x681, Plotinos.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14738526

>no plotinus
sad

>> No.14738638

>>14738526
More interested in getting a good grounding so I can go read hegel and marx and shit. Will probably go back and fill in the gaps at some point but I just want the most important stuff for now

>> No.14738747

>>14738638
You can skip half of Aristotle (or well, practically everything but the Organon, Ethics, and Metaphysics - and even those can be swapped for SEP articles on them), all of those commentaries on Plato and Aristotle, and even St. Augustine and Aquinas if you want to read Hegel and Marx, but you shouldn't skip Plotinus' Enneads (or at least a summary of it) if you want to understand the German Idealists (even though it would be more like trying to get crushed potato chip bits out of the bottom of a bag rather than anything trully substantially different).
More importantly than Aristotle's commentaries, you should read at least one of the Stoics (either Seneca or Epictetus) so you can understand both Spinoza's Ethics and Kant's Critique of Practical Reason, both of which are referenced in Hegel's PoS.

>> No.14738789

>>14738747
You don't think commentaries are useful to get a full grip of the ideas presented? I feel like I could miss a lot by just reading through them without any help.

> so you can understand both Spinoza's Ethics and Kant's Critique of Practical Reason

Would you consider these necessary reads before Hegel?

>> No.14738920

>>14738789
Another person's commentaries are another person's interpretation of yet another person's work.
If you think you might misunderstand Aristotle (hence the need for commentaries on him), you might just end up misunderstanding some early medieval commentary on his work too. Those commentaries were written for people with remarkably different ideas and an upbringing quite unlike present-day people, so you'd probably struggle to understand them no less (possibly more) than Aristotle himself.

As far as I'm aware, Hegel's work most strongly responded to Early Modern-Modern philosophers (Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, Kant), and also to some degree to the Pre-Socratics, Plato, and Aristotle (as evidenced by how much he wrote on them in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy), while having rather little to say on Mediaeval thinkers (a byproduct of him being a Protestant Christian instead of a Roman Catholic).

>> No.14738935

>>14738391
just wikipedia that shit my nigger

>> No.14739030

>>14738920
all good advice, thanks. Plotinus seems like a good shout, but I'm having trouble finding any sources linking the stoics to kant or spinoza. Think I'll amend to plato, aristotle, and plotinus before jumping into the moderns

>> No.14739279

>>14738789
I felt like i didnt need to read much to get into Spinoza's Ethics. I was not too familiar with Aristotle besides a little ethics, and I only rather cometent with Plato. Due to Spinoza's analytic nature, he lays everything out pretty matter of factly with corollaries and such.

>> No.14740157

add Julius Evola

>> No.14740193

>>14738638
Plotinus is for getting into Gnosticism, to clarify

>> No.14740297

>>14740157
Read him on recommendation from here.

I can see why losers here would like it, but there's nothing of value there.

>> No.14741094

Bump

>> No.14741267

>>14738391

I am doing something similar. My list:

> plato: Symposium, the Republic, will probably read the five dialgous etc.

> aristotle: Metaphysics, Politics, Nicomachean Ethics

> hobbes: leviathan

From there on I will jump to Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Hume etc.

>> No.14741295

>>14738391
>>14738526
>>14738638
Other than Plato, Aristotle and Augustine, there is almost no one more necessary than Plotinus. Just buy the Enneads and read the ones you want if you don't have time. I recommend buying the poetic translation by MacKenna and whatever other literal translation there is. Almost everyone considers that the best rendition of the aesthetic side of Plotinus and it was the mans life work itself.

But yes this is fairly doable, just maybe cut out/skim read City of God. I think if you were to actually read all of that it might drag you on over the line.

Ahh, I wish it really was only 25 hours to read.

>> No.14741300

>>14738391
>>14741295
Oh but if you don't also read the poetry and generally appreciate the art of at least Ancient Greece then you wont understand the philosophers.

I also recommend the Pythagorean sourcebook.