Most of my understanding of philosophy has come from second hand

you'd probably do best to start by trying to get a sense of its place in the history of philosophy, what he's agreeing with/rejecting etc. I found Hubert Dreyfus helpful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaGk6S1qhz0

>>9743900
Let me just begin by saying Nietzsche is my area of focus, and I do not think Nietzsche is required reading for B&T despite what many here would have you believe, outside of his essay "On the Use and Misuse of History for Life." Those who are essential to understanding B&T include Plato, Aristotle, Kant, and Descartes.

>>9744418
What makes Dreydigger its own philosophy?

Are you ontologicool?

>>9743900
Eh. BARE MINIMUM you could get away with is Plato's Republic and Aristotles Ethics and Metaphysics.

I would recommend those, in conjunction with Kojève's 'Introduction to the reading of Hegel', Nietzsche's 'Beyond good and evil', and Leo Strauss's 'What is political philosophy?"

Then you'll be pretty much ready to read Being and Time. Descartes Discourse on the Method would help too, it's very short anyway.

Nothing. He is very clear bout his issue. Though it's a pretty much worthless issue of semantics.

Since Heidegger was trying to create a "new Beginning" for philosophy, you really don't need any background. If you're afraid of going into it cold, read Heidegger's Introduction to Metaphysics first, as this gives you the historical background and the motivations for Being and Time.

>>9747017
Kojeve and Strauss are post Heidegger, idiot.

>>9743900
Kant is most helpful, Descartes, Aristotle and Plato also. Also Husserl in some sense.

>>9747213
Read §6 of Sein und Zeit and say that again, pseud. You have no idea about Heidegger if you think he is some radical 'starting all anew'.

>>9747316
Not the original poster but this has been very helpful, thanks.

>>9747017
If you're going to read Strauss to help with Heidegger you may as well go ahead and add in Richard Velkeley's 'Heidegger, Strauss, and the Premises of Philosophy'. Tremendously useful as a treatment of Heidegger's historicism in general, which will help you to understand the way in which he uses the work of previous thinkers.

I also found having read some of Heidegger's later work to be helpful - The Question Concerning Technology, The Turning, The Word of Nietzsche, and Building, Dwelling, Thinking particularly so. H is a difficult but linear writer, and if you lose your way it's much easier to get back on track in a short essay than in a work as long as B&T.

>>9747316
W/r/t Kant you're specifically going to want the Transcendental Deduction, and with some simple commentary for context, like the IEP/SEP articles (it's easy to read the Deduction and get its argument without quite seeing why Kant's making it).

>>9743900

im going to a russell group university and I've not read any academic philosophy, to do philosophy, will I struggle?

>>9746490
Among other things, yes.

>>9747213
This.