essentially

The best place to start Kierkegaard is the garbage can.

>>1408999

Trips of truth

>>1409004

Edgy

>>1408997
finding a good place to start with existentialism is easy or hard depending on what sort of existentialism you're going for. kierkegaard and nietzsche are generally considered the best 'proto-existentialists. you may want to begin with a priming on phenomenology, which influenced more modern existentialists like sartre and heidegger who aren't the friendliest to beginners. then again, no actual philosophical text is very helpful to beginners. you probably want to start with something about the existentialists as a whole before you delve into a particular thinker.

>>1409215

Got any recs?

>>1409246
i'm currently reading "at the existentialist cafe". it's a new book and while pretty long it manages to go both in-depth and while keeping within a beginner's vocabulary. when it comes to existentialism, vocabulary is the first thing you're going to want to build up. and each existentialist manages to come up with a boatload of their own unique terms (even if a similar thinker came up with a bunch of terms for the same concepts).

if you're going to dive into any particular thinker i'd recommend camus though. while technically not an existentialist, he introduces a lot of existential concepts in "the myth of sisyphus", and he's generally regarded as one of the most readable.

>>1409279

Thanks, is Dostoevsky worth checking out? And should I read more fiction like him and Camus before working my way up to non fiction?

>>1409296
dostoevsky is very worth checking out, and camus references both him and kafka in 'sisyphus', so there's that. for every philosopher it definitely helps to read their fiction (if they wrote any) before their nonfiction. for example, with sartre, you want to start with nausea before you get into any of his essays. i'm still a beginner to existentialism myself so the only suggestion i can give is to just go for it, read whatever you can get your hands on :-)