So I've been reading a bunch of Plato lately and I figure

File: 1500693827744m.jpg (108KB, 1024x616px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1024x616px

>>9791189
Nicomachean Ethics with Joe Sachs.

>>9791195

red-pill me on Nicomachaean ethics please

Read Poetics, Nicomachean Ethics and Politics, then move on. You won't understand anything else.

>>9791189
Organon.

>>9791189
You need to go in with the understanding that Aristotle is extremely dense and deals heavily in abstractions. The hardest Plato is pretty much all of Aristotle. Start with the Organic, as his logic underpins the rest of his work and will serve to introduce you to his style of philosophizing, which is less heavy on dialectics and more focused on providing a wide-ranging systematic study of the "science" in question. It's very much trial by fire. Order should go something like:

Categories - De Interpretatione - Prior Analytics - Posterior Analytics - Physics - Metaphysics - De Anima - De Anima - Nichomachean Ethics - Politics - Poetics

You can fit Topics in there somewhere, preferably before Physics

>>9793016
Do this only if you are satisfied with being a brainlet

File: 1500598859099.jpg (47KB, 645x968px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 645x968px

>mfw trying to comprehend organon

just finished on interpretation and i think ii need to take a break with some fiction

>>9793085
is sophistical refutations inessential?

>>9793132
It's useful if you are interested in refuting sophistry, not really necessary fo understanding his broader philosophy. It's a shorter work anyway so go ahead if you're interested

File: 1200px-Presocratic_graph.png (98KB, 1200x625px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1200x625px

>>9791189
picture related

>>9793085
I disagree.
>Categories - On Interpretation - Topics - Posterior Analytics - Physics - On Generation - On the Heavens - Meteorology - On the Soul - On the Parts of Animals - Metaphysics - Nicomachaen Ethics - Politics

>>9791189
>what's a good place to start
the greeks

>>9793085
Decent list. Would read Anima before Metaphysics, as Aristotle considers study of the soul to fall under natural science, i.e., his "physics."

>>9793272
I mean, not a bad list, but unnecessary unless you want to read almost all of the physical works. Caelo, Generatione, Meteorologica are interesting but not crucial. You will undeniably miss out if you skip them, but frankly most people will already be missing so much on their Aristotle readings that another few gaps in their understanding will go basically unnoticed.

OP you need to read commentaries. Plato commentaries are valuable, but you can at least understand a lot of him without reading any secondary lit. Aristotle demands way more work, case in point: >>9793132.

I definitely recommend Kenneth Telford's commentary on categories/de int.; Hackett edition of prior analytics (for the notes); Aquinas commentary on posterior analytics, as barebones footholds for understanding the organon. IMO one of the biggest challenges with Aristotle is finding and parsing through commentaries that are helpful but don't assume you're a philosophy grad student.

Doing so gets easier as you go on, but doesn't get faster; every new Aristotelian text (obviously) offers new problems to wrangle with for the first time, and even the easier commentaries often presume some level of familiarity with the entire corpus, which can be frustrating when you're trying to understand it for the first time.

t. reading Aristotle and commentaries almost daily for the last 5 months.

>>9793381
I only say De Anima after Metaphysics because an understanding of the actuality/potentiality distinction is extremely useful (and dare I say necessary) when trying to get a grasp on his theory of sense perception

any good lectures on ari?