What should I know or read before reading David Hume?

>>1856186
How to read.

>>1856202
Whadda zinger. Good one my friend

File: Moonbeam.jpg (1MB, 1448x2016px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1448x2016px

>>1856186
He hated Moonbeam; he is based.

Like the first two books in the Treatise are a refutation of Descartes. If you haven't read at least Descartes Meditations, a lot of references in Hume will fly past you.

>>1857887
while this is true, refuting descartes is something anyone with a half-decent education can do past the quotation he's most famous for, which is firmly grounded assuming you give credit to phenomenologist reasoning, which you should. his refutations of descartes are not the important parts of his work. his illumination of the is/ought problem is one of the most important additions to philosophical history. he also started pushing his finger through different spots of the moral realist fabric, which is to this day good to read because the world still holds moral realist beliefs even though secularism and science has largely set in in the western world. some of these scenarios are set against the backdrop of the potential of determinism, which imo is a waste of time but at the same time you have to understand what determinism is and it's flaws and incompatibilities with other systems of philosophy and reasoning before you can discard it.

tl;dr just read it, then move on to stirner, husserl, and other german phenomenologists, and by then you should be educated enough to apply these methods of reasoning to your situation.

>>1856186
Nothing, you just need to go into it knowing some basic common sense like the sun will rise tomorrow and inductive reasoning.

https://youtu.be/r3QZ2Ko-FOg

File: Philosophers.jpg (2MB, 900x6474px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 900x6474px

I would advise reading Descartes and Locke first in order to get a progression in epistemology.

>>1857887
>>1858046
>Descartes and Locke

Okay, now what should I read before I begin with either of them?

>>1858447
don't fall for that retarded chart. that chart is about "the history of philosophy", which if that's what you're interested in, start with the greeks.

if you want as close to an objective understanding of your existence as possible, stick to the phenomenologists, and only the phenomenologists, because they are the only philosophers that deal solely in objective, first-person demonstratable facts.

>>1858046
Where's Max?

>>1856186
A functioning brain,his writing is one of the most elegant in the history of philosophy,he's very easy to understand.

>>1858447
A functioning brain.

File: Rationalism.jpg (369KB, 992x1106px) Image search: [Google]

369KB, 992x1106px

>>1856186

File: Empiricism.jpg (355KB, 992x1095px) Image search: [Google]

355KB, 992x1095px

>>1858534

File: Leibniz.jpg (122KB, 992x346px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 992x346px

>>1858535

File: France-Britain.jpg (179KB, 992x388px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 992x388px

>>1858536
Read in le order

>>1858536
leibniz ist ein madman

>>1857913
Phenomenology is pseudo bullshit like most continental philosophers. Mentioning the likes of Stirner and Husserl outside of a strictly historical context will get you laughed at in any credible university.

>>1856186
He was Scottish.

Leibniz-Keks

"According to Karl Wilhelm Krause, the personal valet of Adolf Hitler (from 1934 to 1939) the Führer always took a breakfast consisting of Leibniz Keks, a chocolate bar and two glasses of warm milk."

http://www.wow.com/wiki/Leibniz-Keks

>>1858452
Fuck off, retard.

>>1858447
Nothing, Descartes is considered the father of modern philosophy, ideas of a priori and a posteriori and the mind/body problem essentially begin with him.

Start with Meditations on First Philosophy then go forward.

>>1856186
Why would you bother? Hume's just going to show that you don't really know the things you believe anyway.

>>1858452
And 20 page descriptions of hammers.

>>1858046
>bradley in "german" idealism
wew

>>1858920
Can you explain yourself or are you just making a claim with no defense followed by an argument from authority? phenomenology is the only school of philosophy that deals purely in objective reasoning.

>>1860723
Descartes is considered the father of modern making-shit-up*, not modern philosophy.

>>1856186
You can't know nothing, the sun might not rise tomorrow :^)

>>1861401
>implying making a distinction between knowledge and beliefs doesn't give you an advantage over others

>>1856202
came here to post this. kek

>>1861566
Read the chart properly, thanks.