Be real, /lit/ Is it actually necessary to read the entire work

>>9444192
Depends do you want to seriously engage with philosophy or do you just want to feign association with it for social status purposes by parroting out some platitudes occasionally before your mundane existence ends?

>>9444198
I just dont want to spend time reading 600+ of incredibly dense philosophy when I can read a very good summary of their ideas.

File: 18_rango-plays-guitar-aditya-permana.jpg (706KB, 1024x1191px) Image search: [Google]

706KB, 1024x1191px

>>9444192
Go with a summery or secondary.
If you want more it wont hurt to go over the same thing a second time from the source.

>>9444192
Necessary for what?

>>9444192
>contemporary human garbage needs everything summarized in ~100 pages
The Anglo inbreds truly have ruined philosophy.

>>9444202
Well you can go kill yourself. You don't have to do anything.
Again its all about what you actually want to get from the works.
No "summaries" are not a substitute outside the most superficial engagement of the thinkers

>>9444192

Frederick Coplestone's History of Philosophy is an excellent summary.

>>9444221
i want things in plain language not pretentious deliberately obscure language

>>9444220
To understand other philosophers. To say that Hegel and Kant have been the most relevant and cited philosophers of the last 200 years would be a understatement. Most philosophers either respond to or use concepts formulated by Kant and Hegel in their works, and since this happens a certain knowledge of their works may be necessary.

>>9444192
No, OP, you do not in fact have to start with the Greeks. If you want a general overview of their central ideas, sure, go with a summary. Same goes if you want to read someone who was greatly influenced by their work, say, Marx with Hegel's concept of history, for instance then no, you don't have to read all of Hegel's work before you read Marx. Break yourself free from /lit/'s epistemological linearity. A to B to C isn't always the necessary pathway. Summary/Introductory text first. If you want to explore them further, read the original texts.

Simple as.

>>9444314
Kant, yes. But nobody cares about Hegel

>>9444269
>pretentious deliberately obscure language

Please leave this board and never return.

>>9444198
so much projection

>>9444333
t. either pseud, analytic, or both

>>9444269
I'm a business major and I understood what he said. hit the books buddy.

>>9444345
projection

>>9444333
>But nobody cares about Hegel

Nice trips of lies and misinformation.

>>9444333
The last 150 years of philosophy are just a response to Hegel's and Kant's works.

>>9444521
Nietzsche, the most interesting and provocative philosopher in recent memory, barely had any time for either of them, and when he did, he dismantles their bourgeois semantics.