"Start with the Greeks" Thread

OUP is the way to go.

>>8422138
I read the Oxford and it was very good.

Also could you please recommend some good secondary literature about Greeks' history, literature and philosophy? So far I've read and appreciated "The Greeks" by Kitto and "The Origins of Greek Thought" by Vernant.

File: Edge.png (342KB, 400x402px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 400x402px

>>8422138
>Falling for "le start with the greeks" Meme

File: 471.jpg (179KB, 800x872px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 800x872px

>>8422299
>Posting the "Falling for 'le start with the Greeks' meme" meme.

>>>/v/

>>8422299
>not starting with the Greeks

>>8422266
Go for OUP

Read A History of Ancient Greece: Society, Politics and Culture by Pomeroy et al

>>8422138
Knopf Doubleday.

you dont need to start with the presocratics. just read hamilton's mythology and maybe some SEP articles on them. go straight to plato after. read the presocratics later on, maybe when reading a philosopher who refers to them extensively like heidegger

>>8422385
I've already read some Plato and other Greek literature, so I'm not a complete novice. Now I just want to study the Greeks "systematically".

>>8422421
do a more dramatic reading of plato then, one where the order is switched up a bit to help you understand how the dialogues work with each other. the /lit/ philosophy guide has a section on it. im currently doing this and its really helpful imho

>>8422138
>not Starting with the Sumerians

File: 51f+aku1oqL._SX402_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (52KB, 404x500px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 404x500px

>>8422378
Is pic related ok?

>>8422299
ffs is this a meme or not, i've spent $100 on greek literature, fucking regretting it now

>>8423398
what do you plan to do when descartes, nietzsche, hegel, or zizek references an obscure concept that plato developed? is all of philosophy a meme? maybe so, but you can't say so without starting with the greeks.

>>8422138
Early Greek Philosophy is a good book for reading about the presocratics. I'm going through it now. It's in nice short chapters that summarize what each presocratic philosopher was about using whatever fragments are suitable, or available. It comes with a nice introduction and synopsis.

However, if you're starting with the Greeks you must start with Homer, then Hesiod, and even read a few of the early plays before getting into philosophy, which supposedly "began" in 585BC. Homer's epics, for instance were written 2-6 hundred years before that.

You don't start with the pre-socratics, you start with a book on the history of Philosophy.

>>8423405
thanks anon, you're right, and i didnt really spend $100 dollars on the greeks, i just bought the iliad and the odyssey. A lot of people on /lot/ say to start with homer. where should i go after homer?

>>8423425
I would say get edith's mythology- that gives u all the best myths from Pindar and shit- so you have an understanding of the major characters (heracles, perseus, etc.) Prob shoulda done that before homer desu.

After that you can get into Sophocles. Or if you want something different maybe aesop's fables.

Then get into the presocratics. My recommendation would be diogenes laertes lives of eminent philosophers. It hits on everyone from the seven sages to epicurus. It doesnt go too deep into their actual works (if you want that get the oxford pre socratic book) but they arent that important desu. Then read Platos early dialogues, then republic, then aristotle

>>8423412
I've already read Homer and some plays.

>>8423452
>Prob shoulda done that before homer desu.
i already had a good amount of knowledge about the gods and myths before reading the iliad, read a text in HS (forgot name), from movies/vidyahs, and google helped me fill in the blanks. the read went smoothly, at least i think it did. i don't think i missed anything major to understand what was happening.

>Sophocles
is it necessary to read plays from the greeks? i kind of wanted to get into other stuff, like the way they thought, or their mathematics. I mean if their plays get referenced a lot i will, no problem, but i'd rather read that last. what do you think? but if it's better to read those plays after the odyssey, then ill do it

Aesops fables has been on my list, i want to learn how they taught their lessons how they thought, get me? then maybe get into the philosophy.

>>8423452
>>8423524
However, if you're starting with the Greeks you must start with Homer, then Hesiod, and even read a few of the early plays before getting into philosophy, which supposedly "began" in 585BC. Homer's epics, for instance were written 2-6 hundred years before that.

just saw this, fugg...is this a good way to approach the greeks?

if you are only interested in doing a historical treatment of western philosophy, you should only do:

hamilton mythology -> story of philosophy by magee -> SEP articles on sophists and presocratics -> plato -> artistotle -> hellenists

optionally you can do neoplatonism but you're better off learning to read ancient greek then going back to them due to the lack of translations. after those, you can probably move to christian thought then rationalists and empiricists then german idealism and so on. it should take 2-4 years total.

anything else is autism. if you want to read some plays hamilton gives great synopses for them. if you wanna be a classicsboo then go full sperg on with the greeks

>>8423698
I'm italian and so I already studied history of philosophy in high school. Now I've just finished it and I don't just want to study history, philosophy and literature together, not just philosophy.

>>8425673
*I just want

There's no need to read the preSocratics to understand their contributions to philosophical thought. In fact, you could probably find a text that outlines each of their theories in about as much depth as their surviving fragments for $20

>>8425705
Any suggestion for such text?

>>8422138
If you feel you must, Philosophy Before Socrates is the definitive text. If you don't want the commentary (which you really need for context desu), try the Hackett Presocratics Reader with SEP supplementary reading.

Heraclitus: The Cosmic Fragments is also supposed to be a great study of the weeping philosopher

>>8425714
A used highschool intro to philosophy textbook, go garage-sale hopping.

Seriously, you can fully understand the theories of the presocratics by reading their wikipedia entries if you feel like it. They're primarily obsessed with ontology, which is simple to grasp in our age of scientific intellectualism - aside from Zeno of Elea who may require you to draw pictures if your spatial reasoning is particularly poor.

If you are starting with the greeks with the background of understanding philosophy, go by this:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic

>>8425720
Philosophy before Socrates looks like the best choice, but it is too expensive for me at the moment. I think I will buy the OUP edition first.

The First Philosophers -Oxford
Plato - Complete Works
The Basic Works of Aristotle

This is really all you need for primary texts, supply with historyofphilosophy.net for more historical perspective.

There's a shitton of interesting secondary literature so I won't even try, look up the wikis.

I've read the penguin "Early Greek Philosophy", the penguin "The Sophists", and the Oxford "The First Philosophers". I have to say that the Oxford covered the same ground as the two penguin books combined, with MORE primary material, better explanations, etc. It covers the Sophists aswell. I would just read that one and then move on to Plato.

File: Start_with_the_greeks (1).jpg (1MB, 3672x3024px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3672x3024px

Why do people say to start with the Greeks? Is a lot of Greek work mentioned in certain genres? Is it only necessary if you want to read philosophy or is it just always good to read?

Attached the image from the wiki about starting with the Greeks. Is this a good way to go?

>>8425931
Greek thought permeates western literature, it's a shared heritage that all the great works follow. It's like not reading anything from the Bible, though not as central as it once was it would be ignorant to avoid it. Hell, Western Christianity is a great example of greek influence, so much of its system and theological disagreements are filled with Plato and Aristotle and their respective followers in Augustine and Thomas Aquinas.

>>8422482
this

serious question: how is reading Homer and Histories and shit like that supposed to help me with learning philosophy

the Greek philosophers are obviously important as fuck and one can definitely argue for theatre, too, and its good to read some book on their mythology probably

but I just don't get what I'm supposed to get out of some Greeks if I only want to study philosophy

I'm not even saying I'm against reading them, reading is generally good, but still, where is the supposed need to read all of them?

Why do you want to read presocratic philosophy?

>>8427942
some anon on a rwandan left-wing accelerationist forum told him

>>8427869
The homeric honour code is the basis of all western thought