Philosophy Noob

g r e e k s

>>8380047
Critique of Pure reason is the best starting point. Or phenomenology of spirit by Hegel

>>8380654
absolutely this

>>8380654
What this anon said. Those two help lay the groundwork, and make all further readings much easier.

>>8380654
Don't forget Being and Time by Martin Heidegger. Another read that is a good introduction to philosophy that prepares you for more difficult works.

>>8380047
My diary desu

sorry, I had to

>>8380654
>leftist bullshit is the best starting point

Read Rand , Aristotle, and Kierkegaard than run as far away from philosophy as possible and start a business or invent something

don't read philosophy until you're ready to treat it as anything but.

>>8380047
Might is Right by Ragnar Redbeard. Absolute hoot and a wild ride, and envelopes all other philosophies by its inarguable, iron basis in human history

>>8380757
can you leave the board please

>>8380047
>buying
>not reading

>>8380804
Relax I was memeing

In all honesty the more philosophy you can study the better because it exposed you to different modes of thinking which is at the very least fun

File: 19770044.jpg (28KB, 311x475px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 311x475px

>>8380047

File: 1400118740939.gif (58KB, 748x818px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 748x818px

This oughta do it

>>8381858
Make everyone angry?

>>8381869
What's wrong with it?

D E R E I N Z I G E

File: 1452965065330.jpg (72KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 600x600px

I've had this copy and pasted to a text file for future use (when I start getting into philosophy). Would you guys agree with this person? Should Kant be read later on?

"It's no OP's fault. If people are telling him to read these books, then the problem is with them, not with him. The correct approach to philosophy as advocated my most importat universities and professors, is to read INTRODUCTORY BOOKS FIRST.

These books, OP, you are going to understand:

Philosophy: the basics, by Nigel Warburton (general intro)
Justice, by Michael Sandel (on ethics)
Mind: a brief introduction, by John Searle (on the philosophy of mind)
And read a book on critical thinking, which is totally essential, such as Weston's A Rulebook for Arguments.

Also, a great resource is Warburton's podcast Philosophy Bites, full of interviews with philosophers about hundreds of subjects.

By the way, when you decide to read a classic, do use some sort of guide or companion, so that it will be easier for you to understand.


ABOVE ALL, ignore these people on /lit/ who tell you to start by reading Marx and Kant, for Marx and Kant were intellectuals writing for intellectuals, and you are not yet one. You are a beginner, and you should read books written for beginners. And let me tell you: most people who read Marx, Kant, Hegel (and all people who read Deleuze, Derrida, Lacan) do so only to feel superior, and wouldn't be able to have a single proper, honest discussion about their wors, so you shouldn't feel any envy towards them."

>>8381858
yup, that is some kind of history/important authors list
> everyone get mad now bc your own personal tragedies are not specifically addressed by [author] and so you feel entitled to dismiss the entirety of [author]

File: 1445536513497.jpg (77KB, 640x427px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x427px

>>8381858

nice list

I keep having to post this shit:

Read:

Think - Blackburn

A general introduction to philosophy

The Story of Philosophy - Magee

A history of philosophy that is great for laymen. Covers all the main philosophers/philosophies in adequate detail in language that is neither dull or esoteric. Great for getting the gist of the main philosophers.

Then it's up to you.

Do you want to read all the main philosophers?

Are you interested in a certain field? Say logic or ethics? Political theory?

If you want a bit more of a foundation for going off on different paths, read the main fellas (at least their "main works"):

Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Hume, Kant (yeah I know there's important fellas later on but this is a foundation)

>>8380047
Phenomenologie des Geistes in original Deutsch language is the standard intro to philosophy. It lays the groundwork for understanding all other philosophy. If you want to truly understand philosophy, you have to start with Hegel's Phenomenologie. Now, if you can't read german you could go with a translation. But you have already there made a compromise which will leave you with only half an understanding. Heidegger was right, Deutsch truly is the proper language for philosophizing and english translations simply can't convey the depths of meaning between the lines of german prose.

So either learn german and read Hegel, or start with an english translation of Hegel and settle on a partial understanding. If hegel makes no sense on an immediate intuitive level, you are not cut out for philosophy and should probably spend your time on manners more suited to your nature.

>>8382883
no it's not

>Heidegger was right

He also recommended studying the greeks for 10 years. I bet you haven't done that, pleb.

>>8382895
You are clearly misinformed. You won't have any grasp of what the greeks were talking about without a solid grounding in hegelian dialectics. It is the prolegomena to all further studies in philosophy.

>>8382909
hegel was just plotinus for retards

op read plotinus first and then chong wanfeng

>>8381982
Kant, like Heidegger, shouldn't be read at all. Good post otherwise though.

>>8381982
meme post

File: Witcher-Dog.jpg (22KB, 624x480px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 624x480px

>>8381858

Customers are ignorant and not well read, they need something canon and western. You got that Tommy?