Western Philosophical Traditions and Euromodernity

[Anonymous No.15686548]

Hey guys, I am interested in studying the philosophical foundations of Western culture.

I recently have been reading a lot of books that reference Enlightenment philosophies as well as humanism and Greek and Roman thought.

I took a course of metaphysics and epistemology in undergrad as well as a course on Nietzsche, so I'm somewhat familiar with philosophy and how it's written. However, I am lost when they reference Kant or Plato, Socrates, etc. because I am only familiar with them by name from studying history and basic summaries. I am interested in learning about Heidegger as well.

I was wondering which books can give me a good basis with this stuff. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.15686795]

>>15686548

[Anonymous No.15686815]

>>15686548
Copleston's history of philosophy is widely considered an accessible gold standard if you don't want to engage with primary texts.

>>15686795
Might also be a good suggestion for a brief overview, although it is very tendentious and not at all unanimously respected among academic philosophers.

[Anonymous No.15686921]

>>15686548
Just start reading Plato's dialogues. Everything else is a footnote to his works.

[Anonymous No.15686926]

>>15686548
Just read Proclus' Elements of Theology and you are done with the Greeks.

[Anonymous No.15686928]

>>15686795
Bertrand Russell has some hot takes in this book that are real fuckin' garbage. It may be worth entertaining to consider another perspective but if you replace the practice of actually studying classics to build your own understanding with subscribing to Russell's view, you're going to be missing a lot.

[Anonymous No.15686969]

>>15686928
Yeah, I wanted moreso to actually studying the classics and not just read someone else's interpretation or narrative.

[Anonymous No.15686982]

>>15686548
Then read Plato.

[Anonymous No.15686983]

>>15686928
kek
his chapter on nietzsche is somewhat dismissive is it not? plus the unnecessary padding on the catholic church
but a strong coherent narrative nonetheless

[Anonymous No.15687092]

>>15686969
Here's my suggestion, follow the chain of influence. Before diving into works of the last thousand years, start with the relevant classics to the area of study you are doing.

People tend to fall into a school of either Platonist idealism or Aristotelian type of empiricism, so picking a particular philosophy and following it back to its conceptual "beginning" tends to land on either of them.(though not always)
Tell me who it is specifically you want to know about, and I'll give you some suggestions.
>>15686983
He's an intelligent man, regardless of my contention, but he embodies everything wrong with modern philosophical study. We suck at reading subtext and take a lot of things too literally to gain any real understanding.
Modern students really want things said plainly in simple terms instead of to solve problems.
So with Russell you end up with the relatively modern misconceptions like that "Socrates only cared about ethics."
When in reality, the only thing he cared about was religion and the soul - ethics were just part of that.

[Anonymous No.15687106]

>>15686548
The passion of the western mind and From dawn to decadence