Is there a more spectacular blunder possible than reading Nietzsche

... really? I ... kind of was going to start reading it this monday.

>>7561542
Don't listen to him. Just take your time and read him thoroughly; anything you don't understand just look up.

Nietzsche is very much based off older authors, but at the same time is highly idiosyncratic in both his style/methods and his goals. As long as you stay vigilant throughout the reading, you should be able to get something from it.

>>7561542
Don't listen to OP. Nietzsche is a lot of fun and pretty profound.

That's what I did. Granted I'm not an impressionable retard, so it didn't fuck me up. He's easier and more enjoyable to read than other philosophers.

I'd say before reading any primary sources it's best to read a reasonably in depth overview of the subject to learn the key themes, approaches, ideas, etc.

Anyone who has done that should really just start with whoever interests them first. Besides, Nietzsche is great to read as just literature, so I really don't see why it would be a problem for someone.

>>7561538

Start with the Greeks. Always start with the Greeks. Then jump to Kant, then Schopenhauer (the only philosopher worth a damn).

>>7561558
>>7561558

You've obviously never read any Schopenhauer then. I have a book containing all of his essays and I can just get lost in them for hours. They are just brilliant and I've had a few chuckles. If you haven't read much Schopenhauer, give him a chance. His style of writing is just..I love it. Words can't describe. I am a Schopenhauer fan boy I would be that mans servant and pour him wine on demand.

>>7561566
>waste your time guys trust me

Nietzsche responds directly or indirectly to the following thinkers

Plato
Aristotle
Cicero
St. Paul
Augustine
Duns Scotus
Luther
Spinoza
Hume
Kant
Schopenhauer
Hegel

Sure, he's such an amusing reader that you can enjoy him by himself, but you'll have no real basis or grounds for appreciating his thought. When Nietzsche talks about Master Morality and Slave Morality, when he talks about the death of God, you won't have any idea what it all means. I see no reason to read him first.

>>7561569
>Schopenhauer
He's just funny-named Plato.

>>7561580
U forgot Kierkegaard brethren

>>7561553
>>7561554
Well, I'll see. Ty anon.

>>7561566
can you stop memeposting already? every damn thread, "Schopenhauer is the only philosopher worth a damn." This is the third time I've seen it. You even made your own thread about Schop, in which you unironically agreed with "On Women," which is why I'm descarting your opinion.

>>7561605
I see what you did there

>>7561589
Nietzsche didn't read any Kierkegaard

>>7561605

Schopenhauer is right about everything.

Prove me wrong

>protip: You Kant

>>7561605

By the way, if you find my memeposting offensive, I'm sorry. But I am a textbook oppressive patriarchal overlord and "On Women" is 100% correct. Memes are ok, but I am serious. Meme cheese on bagels.

Whats the point of reading philosophy and memorizing all of these ideas from other people?

To me its better to come up with such ideas yourself, then its time to read.

>>7561626
There is no proof he did, however that's unimportant to what I supposed, he definitely responded indirectly to kierkegaard.

>>7561634
There's no such thing as coming up with ideas yourself. No man is an island.

Not to mention the more (good) philosophy you read, the more you'll realize how many great ideas there are to learn from

>>7561638
It's not really responding if you don't read the ideas. But there's no doubt that reading Kierkegaard and Nietzsche together is a patrician move

>>7561634
Reinventing the wheel much?
The idea is to build your own thoughts, only having people who did that before helping with stuff they've come to experience too.

In the same way that a conversation is useful to expand knowledge and ideas.

>>7561640

>There's no such thing as coming up with ideas yourself. No man is an island.

Of course not. We have our daily lives, the enviroment we live in, the societal state of our community and the people that we talk to. Those things that come in contact with the body do not speak directly to the soul. But is enough to think and form your own conclusions.

Philosophy does not come from the exterior, nor from the poisonous languages, but from the inside.

>>7561654

>Reinventing the wheel much?

There was no wheel in the first place.

They sure created a wheel for themselves.

Better to think of something that satisfies one soul, before accepting something alien to us.

Nothing wrong with reading them tho, its alright.

Shut up.

>>7561684

No.

Its a thread about philosophy nothing off topic.

>>7561688

Shut up.

File: 1447881054223.jpg (42KB, 500x580px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x580px

>mfw I read his stuff at the age of 15

Is there a more spectacular blunder possible than not reading Nietzsche as your very first philosopher?

I mean, think of how much time you're saving not having to decipher Hegel's completely incoherent bullshit

>>7561859
Considering many scholars don't think Nietzsche read Hegel I really doubt it's important to get through him. In fact I would say you only need to be familiar with the general trends of modern philosophy up until him.

File: 109588.jpg (43KB, 318x396px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 318x396px

After you read pic related, you can go on to pretty much any philosopher and have the adequate knowledge any of them would expect you to have to read their work.

>>7561580
I read him first and I got all of that m8, those dwfinitely aren't the parts you'll miss out on...

>>7561542
Just don't start with Zarathustra, and you can make it through. Nietzsche is one of the most readable philosophers; his writings even have a literary quality to them.

>>7563287
Why not I just started it

>>7561634
>thinking you can come up with any ideas independent of the philosophical tradition

kek m8

>>7561569
You had a few chuckles??? Blimey m9, Ima get me some o' what you're takin'.

>>7561542

Ok, read Plato first, though, seriously. And read it in German - he writes really beautifully, and it just doesn't get across in translation.

>>7561656

>the poisonous languages

Why are you even on /lit/, then, you massive god damn fucking pleb? Leave.

>>7563320
There's a lot of time that Nietzsche looks like he's contradicting himself but actually isn't and you can get lost in it because of the figurative language in Zarathustra. For example, when he talks about the Will to Truth sometimes it's complete praise and sometimes it's utter scorn. To understand that, one should read the section about philosophical asceticism from The Geneology of Morals. You have to know what exactly he is referring to in another work to understand his aphorisms, or in the case of Zarathustra, his figurative language. For example, when you read "Of the Afterworldsmen" you won't really get that he is critiquing The Birth of Tragedy's Wagnerism unless you read either the Birth of Tragedy or the section from Ecce Homo about it. He appears really incoherent and most of all in Zarathustra or the short aphoristic sections of his other book, because he wanted to be an "artistic socrates" but the more you read of him the more knots get tied.

>>7563320
It's cryptic and easy to misinterpret. He's much more clear in his other works.

>>7561634
To stand on the shoulders of giants, duh.

>>7561850
Same. It stopped me from being depressed. I probably would have spent a lot on therapists or prozac. Thank you based Nietzsche.

>>7563456
>Birth of Tragedy or the section from Ecce Homo about it

When I read him, I would read one of his earlier works and then read what he wrote about it in Ecce Homo. I don;t know if that was good way of doing it, but it helped me out.

>>7561605

>buttsore Hegel worshipper

Eat shit tbhfam

>>7563360
Oh yes? Then how did the philosophical tradition begin? And how is anon not in a position to do the same?

Just read Durant's Story of Philosophy first, then read whatever strikes your fancy

>>7561656
Ayn Rand, please leave.

>Reading Nietzsche without first understanding the conceps he tears down.

>>7561569
He's a fucking baby though, he never stops crying about how much everyone got it wrong except for him and how he's the best and hegel is a poopyhead.

I read birth of tragedy and had no clue what was going on. Gave up around 3.5/4's of the book.

Basically i wasted my time and i recommend starting with the greeks and reading slowly.

The aporia of philosophy is whether to out-Hegel Hegel, or to revert to Kant. Lukács chose the former, and Adorno chose the latter.

>>7561538
Why not, it's not like teenagers and girls would ever understand Plato.

Thus spoke Zarathustra was my first philosophical book. I didn't understand a shit, I received a bunch of disconnected ideas.
Then I read the Antichrist, It was pretty clear, I returned to Zarathustra and It was more readable that time.

>>7561656
>Assuming your thoughts are original

>>7563765
It's not impossible to come up with truly original ideas without reading other people, but highly unlikely. i.e. Most people when thinking about the mind still envision the mind and body as separate (dualism) not understanding that their thinking is quite commonplace and the result of Cartesian influence that persists in popular culture (and science) to this day.

>>7563424
Yeah because everyone knows German

>>7561634
You'll end up being boring and redundant. Trust me, there are thousands of people from history smarter than you who said ideas you might come up with in much clearer or more poetic language.

The kind of people who say "I like philosophy, but I don't read any" are GIGANTIC faggots.

>>7563481
How did it stop you from being depressed? Elaborate.

>>7563320
His idiom in Zarathustra is leveraged partially on you knowing his style and way of thinking from his previous books.

Would it be ok to start reading him with Human, All Too Human? Birth of Tragedy doesn't sound very interesting to me

No, treating philosophy like it's a straightforward progression of ideas is what's stupid.

Are you guys ever going to figure out the idea of a virtuous circle in interpretation?

>>7561605
>descarting
heh
I started with meditations, true fact.

>>7564126

That's what makes him awesome. The world i s full of phonies.

>>7561859
t. Schopenhauer

>>7561538
>>7561558
What does a first-time Nietzsche reader gone wrong look like?

File: 1406778484309.jpg (43KB, 497x470px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 497x470px

>>7566539

>>7565883
Not him, but life just seems much more enjoyable now. I think part of it is just his philosophy being so interesting and fun.