Hey /lit/ I wasn't really sure if I should ask here or /hist/,

>>8429824
>[old dead smart guy] --->[old dead smart guy] --->[old dead smart guy] --->[old dead smart guy]....

why do we have to do this everyday

>>8429824
Read Magee's 'The Story of philosophy'
It's a short book that comprises the most important thinkers and their works
You won't learn shit about actual philosophy but you'll get a good idea what's all about

>>8429824
get a solid history of philosophy book and then read what you want

>>8429838
thanks

Go chronologically mate. Russell's history of western philosophy (despite its faults) is a great introduction. Read a few of the texts he mentions. I've just finished reading Seneca and am about to start the early Catholics. It's definitely better than going straight into "thus spoke zarathustra" and not understanding any of it, yet thinking Nietzsche's right because he uses big words.

>>8429824
Start with the Greeks is pretty much the best way to start reading into Philosophy. The Greeks pretty much set the foundation of Western philosophy and kickstarted the whole thing.

A lot of philosophers base their ideas on philosophers before them especially the Greeks. If you want, think of their works as a sort of response to the philosophers before them. Ancient Greek philosophy finds its influence everywhere in Western philosophy, so reading the Greeks is pretty much mandatory. Heidegger for example, found influence in Parmenides's idea of "it is" and "it is not."

Start with the pre-Socratics such as Parmenides and Heraclitus is my advice.

>>8429824
The Greeks, but not entirely chronological. Read up on the pre-socratics, the sophists, and Socrates, then start with Plato (start with the Apology of Socrates). Afterwards, go back to the sophists. Then Aristotle and continue chronologically.
Another tip: If eastern philosophy interests you, you can start there with the Daodejing and possibly Zhuangzi. I found that, at the latest when you get to the Stoics in your western reading, there are some interesting connections to be made.

>>8430548
>better than going straight into "thus spoke zarathustra" and not understanding any of it, yet thinking Nietzsche's right because he uses big words.

This was literally literally me at 15