Rate my philosophy reading list

>>9310050
Nice one, just ditch the Jung.

philosophy of history is the only worthwhile thing you have there

should have gotten philosophy of right instead tho

File: IMG_20170329_103349998.jpg (680KB, 1700x1501px) Image search: [Google]

680KB, 1700x1501px

>>9310069
Could sub him out for politics of Aristotle bro

Critique of Pure Reason ended everything else on that reading list

>>9310087
Its the boringest one tho

I seriously hope you started with the Greeks.

>>9310050
Have you read the prerequisites for these? Or are you simply diving into kant with no prior knowledge of descartes, leibniz, spinoza, locke? Hegel can come after Kant, that's fine, however you should supplement them both with critiques. Jung? I'd read jung with other psychologists, rather than philosophers.

>>9310050

Phenomenology of Spirit was the book that got me started, I remember clearly, everything I read was too easy and I wanted to go deeper. It's easily the most dense book, it should be thicker normally than your edition, I read in French.

Critique of Pure Reason is my favourite and theabsolute best of all time, it really holds a very special place and stands out the strongest.

After that I read French authors and decided to go back to the very beginning and read chronologically even before the trifecta of Socrates-Plato-Aristotle with Heraclitus as very first base, Anaximander, Protagoras, Zeno, Pythagoras.

Phenomenology of the Spirit is really the book that woke me up and everything thereafer in ways was made easier to understand since it's so dense.

>>9310050
The Will to Power is a fake fabricated by Nietzsche's sister long after he was mentally too diminished to realise what was happening to his late manuscripts.
Read said late manuscripts as is rather.

>>9310050
The last one is bullshit. I mean, that book doesn't exist. This >>9310158
Read everything else and The Antichrist (the only true Will To Power/Transvaluation of all values book).

Nice goodwill haul

>>9310050
Intro-tier reading list, but good luck and have fun nonetheless. Before you read the original texts, read the stanford encyclopedia of philosophy articles on each philosopher beforehand so you can be sure that you're not totally misreading them.

>>9310158
>>9310190
>Nietzsche fags on damage control

>>9310213

>Intro-tier reading list

For post-grad, yes.

File: 6kDVVV.jpg (97KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 1024x576px

>Hegel
Why is this board so in love with this literal garbage

>>9310050
Protip: Instead of reading those six books, read the "Critique of pure reason" six times.

>>9310242
Don't listen to this guy
Instead of wasting time on Critique, read the secondary material on Critique from six different scholars. Kant was a shit writer.

>>9310237

Why? Why not?

>>9310257
He's probably another Nietzsche fag.

>>9310158
>>9310190
Modern editions like the one edited by Kaufmann were able to correct a lot of Elisabeth's meddling. Though it shouldn't be read as a complete "work" because we don't know what Nietzsche would have included, it's undeniable that the fragments come from Nietzsche himself and are valuable in that sense.

>>9310190

Thus Spoke Zarathustra

>>9310050
Completely random

>>9310149
>reading hegel before kant before the greeks
why

>>9310237
Literally one of the most important philosopher ever lived. Influenced radically all 19th and 20th centuries. You're just an idiot

>continental

>>9310447
Alright, fair enough friend.

>>9310485
>Influenced radically all 19th and 20th centuries.
true
>one of the most important philosophers ever
false

>>9310522
The first sentence implies the other one. You can say they're both wrong ( being stupid) or accepting the truth

>>9310247
>Asses would prefer sweepings to gold.
(Heraclitus)

>>9310475

Pre-Logic.

Aristotle precipitated the need to start from the source.

"Philosophy is the fruit of astonishment."

"If you want to know the root cause of a problem, you need to go back to the source."

>>9310535
>The first sentence implies the other one.
No. From "someone influenced the thinking of two centuries" does not follow "he/she is one of the most important philosophers ever".
There were quite a few philosophers who influenced eight or more subsequent generations - not many of them are considered "important" nowadays. And there's a good chance Hegel might be pretty much forgotten in eight or nine centuries.

>>9310647
You obviously never studied philosophy in your life. "There were quite a few philosophers" vague and false. Also I think the two world wars won't be forgotten any soon.

File: image.jpg (5KB, 168x240px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 168x240px

>>9310543

The source is metaphysics.

File: time to stop posting.jpg (7KB, 238x212px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 238x212px

>>9310690
Seriously boy, you're making a fool of yourself...

>>9310690
>>9310858
>It's a two anons wag their e dicks about who doesn't know philosophy more episode

Yes!