What are some "must read" philosophy books?
I'm interested in philosophy and my friend told me to read these ones:
Meditations by Marcus Aurelius
Letters from a Stoic by Seneca
Fragments by Heraclitus
Essays by Montaigne
Essays and Aphorisms by Arthur Schopenhauer
Is he right, /lit/?
>no plato, ARISTOTLE, descartes, hume, kant, hegel, kierkegaard, or NIETZSCHE
no
>>8466968
Sounds like your friend is a fucking faggot who wouldn't know philosophy if it rammed itself up his ass going 186,282 mp/s
sounds like he just likes nice sayings/aphorisms
>>8467111
What should I read then?
>>8467111
It's a good starting point, he gave OP the least hated on writers who are clear, entertaining and practical. I'm sure OP would find his way, Schopenhauer requires Kant (who references Hume) and naturally leads into Nietzsche (who references everybody who matters).
>>8466968
Pensées (thoughts) by Pascal is pretty good beginner tier too
>>8467141
Just read books about topics that interest you.
There's no "required reading" in philosophy, because there's so fucking much of it. If you want comprehensive knowledge, pick a smattering of popular works from various eras and start reading them.
I'd recommend Plato's The Republic for your Greek studies though. It's still useful to this day.
>>8467141
it depends, if you want to get really into philosophy you'd probably benefit from starting at the beginning and reading the important guys down the line.
but you can also just read what interests you. the problem with that is that your understanding will be even more limited without the proper background.
maybe do the basics "properly"/in order, and read some of the things that interest you on the side.
personally i'm still reading through Republic, but there's a group read of Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and since i know i will return to this book once I've read the "prereqs" and it really interests me, I've joined in. before starting Plato I was doing a course on Kierkegaard out of interest and that made me want to understand more, which meant going way back.
there's a coursera course on Plato and Aristotle that is decent and short.
>>8467141
I agree with the suggestion to read what you are interested in.
Do you just have a vague interest in "philosophy" or are you actually interested in some topics?
>>8467131
thats every philosopher ever, man
>>8467225
Metaphysics is a pretty solid first choice. I'd also make sure not to skip Rhetoric before you move on.
Make sure you're ready for very dry reads. I'd keep an entertaining book on hand for when you need a break. It's very easy to fall into just looking at the words, and not actually comprehending what he was trying to say with them.
>>8467111
I agree about plato, but aristotle blows. Vague, uninsightful BS. "Things are good because I say so/ I percieve that most people think so". Plato is timeless, Aristotle just repeats himself a lot.
>>8467197
lol.
>>8466968
>philosophy
>lists only some self help tier pseudophilosophy books
welp
>>8468159
Well, those books are just recommendations, what would you suggest?
Don't read the Penguin Heraclitus
It's full of mistranslations
>>8467520
Any dialogues of Plato that you recommend?
>>8468192
Going through 9 volumes of History of Philosophy by Fredrick Copleston and after each one reading 3-4 most important works in it.
Unless getting into philosophy is something you want for self help. In that case Camus and Aurelius sound like good choices.
>>8468201
just ignore all of these dilettantes and start with a history of philosophy by an academic
go for The Story of Philosophy by Bryan Maggee
>>8468235
especially ignore the idiots calling Seneca and co pseudophilosophy
Nassim Taleb to be honest.
>>8466968
If you're interested in philosophy run the fuck away from this board and only come back after reading a lot. /lit/ unironically believes that "starting with the greeks" is a meme and completely disregards the importance of studying history of philosophy alongside actual philosophy.
>>8466968
He's right about the stuff to get you into philosophy. Although the works he mentioned aren't that good.
You need to go on and read Aristotle, maybe Plato and then Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche, if you're feeling French and Adventurous even Camus and when you know some shit, just read some Žižek like you don't give a fuck, he's basically the only one relevant today.
this guy knows >>8467168
>>8468489
Žižek is almost completely irrelevant.
He has had very little influence, don't talk out of your ass.
>>8466968
here https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/edit?pref=2&pli=1
>>8468489
>just read some Žižek like you don't give a fuck, he's basically the only one relevant today.
>>8467225
>>8467315
I would really advise you against starting with Aristotle's Metaphysics. The Nicomachean Ethics is far less difficult and also opens up his political thought. It's also the book most relevant to the "how should I live my life?" question, which is what brings most people to philosophy in the first place.
>>8466968
Those are all alt-right /pol/ bullshit. Where did you got your recs?
>>8468489
>You need to go on and read Aristotle, maybe Plato and then Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche.
How do I start with Descartes, Kant and Nietzsche?
Shouldn't I read other authors before them?
>>8468881
A friend of mine who studies Philosophy
>>8469203
>read Aristotle, maybe Plato and THEN Descartes, Kant, Nietzsche.
maybe learn how to read first. read apology/crito by plato and listen to lectures on them. think about the next step AFTER that.
>>8469216
>studies philosophy
>there's nothing related with Plato or Aristotle
>no Kant
>no Spinoza
>no Sartre
I think you dun goofed, anon.
>>8468201
Phaedrus and symposium to start, Euthydamus, meno and the republic.
fuck Aristotle. I'm still bummed that I wasted my time on Ethics.
all of them
>>8468252
t. i am the warrior of my day dreams
http://mundusmillennialis.com
>>8468494
>>8468750
Y u hatin
Žižek is a legend. He's like a kid in a playground. Who else is going to be relevant today, go read Chomsky, the jew, if you think he's better. Or that other jew who talked on TED, yeah he seems like a good relevant philosopher. Out of any someone today who knows some shit, Žižek is probably your best choice. And he's not that difficult to read, but I'll admit, I read him in Slovene, he's probably even more relevant to us Slovenians than he is to you. Still a pretty good philosopher, people here are often criticising him, so hes not iconic or anything, but overall he's well recieved from philosophers, especially ones who actually know him or have read deeper into him.
>>8469932
>>8467520
I liked Aristotle, he says stuff like "it seems that..." but he gets that from observing society and does a good job at it. It's not just something he makes up. Plato was a narcissistic autistic fag who had his little school and taught everyone something like he knows it all. He had some great ideas and i think they should be percieved great for their time and appreciated in that frame, but I wouldn't say he's superior to Aristotle as far as ethics go. He actually helped shape Alexander the Great who was... well... Great.
>>8468811
Listen to him.
>>8466968
START WITH THE GREEKS
http://www.philosimply.com/philosopher/hesiod
>>8471348
>who are all the academic philosophers
yeah just go read the wacky slovenian ""philosopher""
>>8471348
>Žižek is a legend.
I'm assuming legend means meme
>He's like a kid in a playground.
And also a second rate philosopher.
>Who else is going to be relevant today, go read Chomsky, the jew, if you think he's better.
They recently published an article on 50 most influential contemporary philosophers. And it's a pretty decent list. 50 more are more influential since he is second rate, no philosophy of his own.
>Or that other jew who talked on TED, yeah he seems like a good relevant philosopher.
I'm assuming you only know 5 contemporary philosophers in total.
yay/nay?
I want to read this because it was in the matrix but I'm not the least bit versed in philosophy.
>>8471412
>>8471418
>muh patrician taste
>I-I'm much b-better because I know more philosophers than y-you and read stuff I don't understand
>has never read Žižek, just listened to his le funny jokes
You're like those aristocrats who don't appreciate anything common and think they'll be able to appreciate anything "high-tier"
just stop retarding to be pretended
Why do you hate zizek? He's a good critic for a commie. Very insightful.
>>8471418
>someone on some forum said something is a meme so it must be
>>8467120
What about if it was going 186,282 Mb/s?