Quick question. What should i read before: 1. Kant 2. Hegel 3.

Hegel to understand Kierkegaard, Kant to understand Hegel.
But Hegel needs much more time to be fully appreciated.

>>8404321
1. Plato
2. Kant
3. Hegel

In this order:

>Plato
>Aristotle
>Descartes
>Hume
>Kant
>Fitche
>Schelling
>Hegel
>Kierkegaard

>>8404321
>>8404321
1. Read some Plato, Aristotle's Metaphysics. Descartes' Meditations and Hume's Enquiry concerning Human Understanding.
2. Read the ones from number 1 + Kant.
3. Read Hegel (number 2) and basic understanding of protestant theology + Kierkegaards biography.

Next step is read some Husserl and presocratics and then take on Heidegger.

File: Schoppy.png (419KB, 977x1000px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 977x1000px

>>8404321

>2016
>Reading Hegel
>Mfw

Just get the Oxford 'Very Short Introduction' if you REALLY need to read Hegel, for whatever reason.

i wish there were more portraits of soren. so handsome

>>8404745
What about Leibniz

>>8405386
Best biscuits.

>>8404902
yeah hes really cute, made me wanna learn danish so i could read his originals text and imagine his voice with some ASMR playing in the background and pretending he was whispers his sensuous musings into my ear

>>8405386
who cares lol

I know Aristotle is essential but I don't think it's worth it to read all of his work, right? Could I get away with just Metaphysics, Ethics, Poetics, Politics, and Rhetoric? I'm not sure how important his work in logic is.

>>8405386
literally irrelevant

>>8407474
"just"? Just Metaphysics will take you months with secondary literature if you actually want to study it. In any case, I don't think reading Aristoteles in a vacuum is that insightful unless you are really interested in ancient philosophy. You won't get the historic value of his work if you haven't read a lot of more contemporary philsophy to put his ideas into a philosophic-historic context.

>>8404745
Fichte, Schelling AND Hegel.
Schopenhauer would like you to just die now, you insufferable pleb.

>>8407540
I know it sounds like a lot to say "just," but I've been reading Aristotle for a few months already. Metaphysics was definitely difficult, even with secondary texts. I'm ok with living and breathing Aristotle for a little while longer; I've just heard of people who devote their whole lives to him.

>>8406270
I've dabbled in Danish anon, and let me tell you: it's easy as hell to learn for an English speaker (not including pronunciation).

>reading Descartes/Spinoza/Leibniz without understanding medieval scholasticism
>reading Kant without understanding Christian Wolff
>reading Plato/Aristotle before presocratic fragments

>>8407768
kek at reading heraclitus. shut the fuck up anon

>>8407781
Parmenides is more essential.

>>8407548
it is the opposite of what you say it is

>>8407768
all of these things are fine