I'm tired of being merely above average when it comes to

>be interested in a historical subject
>read primary sources

>I'm tired of being merely above average

I got bad news for you, bud...

>>533837
>subjects I'm interested in such as philosophy, history, and economics (mainly theory)
Could you be a little bit more specific? If you're giving that vague directions you might as well stay average in all these fields.

>>533916
I didn't do that because I wouldn't get any replies in a long wall of text and neither will this, so I'll summarize it;
>philosophy; mainly all the words and definitions so I can get into real philosophy - I have read some works from Nietszhe and Hicks, but I only understand half of it
>book covering major history so I can advance to more deepen my knowledge in more nisched areas
>babbys first layman economics

Still monitoring this thread.

>>533837
"Theory" is a bunch of trash written by people trying to get tenure or cuck their peers. Read the original shit in the original language.

>>533837
Start reading theory.
Start reading methodology.
Start reading journals.

>>533947
>philosophy; mainly all the words and definitions so I can get into real philosophy - I have read some works from Nietszhe and Hicks, but I only understand half of it

Western philosophy is a bunch of footnotes on Plato and Aristotle that dead ends in almost every direction in the early modern period until it turns into (a) science and metascience and (b) the dialog of elite "intellectuals."

>babbys first layman economics
Economics: "The Dismal Science" is a decent historical intro

>book covering major history

Of what? Like the US? Europe? The West? The World?

File: IMG_0214.jpg (25KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 320x320px

>>534507
>Start reading journals.
He didn't say he wanted to produce work that was sucking a diss committee's cock or some other gradecuck activity. He wants to actually learn. This is a very high impedence way of doing that.

MAYBE reading journal abstracts from very well regarded journals is a good idea, but it's usually just confusing for people. They think they know some secret shit because it was in muh journal, but in reality, it's just some novel idea that a referee let slip through.

>>534523
this to be honest familiar

>>534507
> Start reading methodology.
Best thing I've read in a while. I've a gigantic boner for methodology. It's your bread and butter when taking on new theories and facts.

>>533947

Try 'Basic Economics' by Sowell.

>>536247
Stop shitposting.

End your life

File: fraud.jpg (27KB, 574x330px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 574x330px

>>533837
Murray N. Rothbard: A History of Money & Banking in the U.S.

File: goodwill.jpg (8KB, 306x165px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 306x165px

Read Vickers.

>>533947
Before *anything* you need to have a firm grasp on logic and arguments. People *think* they're good at it because we as humans are just shitty and biased. 4chan in particular is a prime example of a lot (but not all) shitty thinking.

Reason and Argument by is excellent in this regard. Here's the first chapter from an old version of the book.

http://fitelson.org/101/feldman_ch1.pdf