[ 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: 269 KB, 650x594, 1596998129672.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16102008 No.16102008 [Reply] [Original]

How do i chose wich of Plato's works to read when "starting with the greeks" in philosophy? I can't just read all of them, is there a chart to guide me according to my personal interests?

>> No.16102018
File: 363 KB, 1600x900, F5001848-32C8-41B9-8A80-599BE1AE3521.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16102018

Check these out first
https://historyofphilosophy.net/

>> No.16102019

Don't start with Plato, you start with the Pre-Socratics, obviously

>> No.16102032

>>16102008
Start with Gorgias, Protagoras or Laches

>> No.16102035

>>16102008
No good chart for Plato sadly, but to start there is nothing better than "Plato Five Dialogues", then Ion. Then you should read a few smaller ones like those, such as Cratylus. Then Republic and afterwards Symposium. Then read a bunch more of his smaller works, after that then read Philebus and Phaedrus. I'm not going to explain any more but that's a good set, 'till you get up to the harder dialogues.

>> No.16102042

>>16102019
How do i pick with pre-socratics to read when "starting with the greeks" in philosophy? I can't just read all of them. Is there a chart to guide me according to my personal interests?

>> No.16102107

>>16102042
Just be familiar with some of the things Heidegger said about them, start with Heraclitus, do a survey of all the presocratic thinkers from Thales down to Empedocles and similar figures. Then read Parmenides and then start on reading about Thales, Anaximander, his student and then you don't have to read all of them, but then read Empedocles and you should be PRETTY well set with the presocratics. It may also not hurt to read some overall secondary on them, rather than just primary descriptions and remnants.

But read at least 7 works of Plato before you read Heraclitus and the presocratics so you better understand the developments of Plato, as well as of the Presocratics.

>> No.16102177
File: 154 KB, 616x455, FD97B08A-E0AC-4890-AC6A-4EA5B64C82AD.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16102177

Here you go, OP. A real response.

>> No.16102188

>>16102107
So i do start with Plato, right?

What is a good suplementary work to read alongside Plato?

>> No.16102243

>>16102177
Thanks, that'll help a lot.

>> No.16102254

>>16102008
>I can't just read all of them
why not

>> No.16102292

>>16102243
No don't listen to that, it's horrible reductive of the whole point of the dialogue and reduces the actual "focus" of the dialogue, not to mention does not include a myriad of other defining orderings. It might be useful to just hold all the dialogues in your mind at once with this, but don't look at it too seriously.

>> No.16102298

>>16102243
>>16102292
For example, Parmenides being "the traps of reason" is perhaps a shard of what the meaning of the dialogue actually is. And it is something affirmative, in contrast to how some people view its obscurity.