I have never read any Philosophy book.
How bad is the idea of starting with Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra?
Tips fedora and memes aside.
That's actually a pretty cool painting
>>7456358
A better place to start might be with Beyond Good and Evil, especially the Preface, and Chapters 1 ("On the Prejudices of Philosophers"), 5 ("Natural History of Morals") and 9 ("What is Noble?") (though the whole book is worth reading). That might be followed by Nietzsche's On the Genealogy of Morality, which could be read in conjunction with the chapters of my Nietzsche on Morality discussing each essay.
From there one might go in two directions: backwards to The Gay Science, one of Nietzsche's earlier works, or forward to The Twilight of the Idols. I'd probably recommend the latter: this is a late work, not as overwrought as The Antichrist or Ecce Homo, but philosophically substantial, covering most of Nietzsche's main concerns.
>>7456358
Bad idea. You need to read other stuff Nietzsche wrote before reading that. If you really want you could read him if you understand some basic ideas of other philosophers, mostly Schopenhauer and Kant as well as the Greeks. He's accessible because he writes very poetically and non-technically. But Nietzsche is not really a good starting place if you want to understand all of philosophy.I started with him though and I didn't die.
>>7456373
There's a Greeks thread in the catalog now.
It might be a good idea to read some works from Plato or just start with Beyond Good and Evil?
>>7456358
it'll be good for your seto kaiba cosplay
>>7456393
I wouldn't read Plato unless you are interested in Plato, Nietzsche does a good job of critiquing the Greeks. Of his very last writings, I find Twilight of the Idols to be the most helpful. (A number of sections on the ancients and Socrates, perhaps his most clear critique of the idea of free will, morality as anti-nature and the best statement of the will to power as a principle of affirmation.)
>>7456401
lel
![843433[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/lc4jHm5.jpg "843433[1].jpg")
Before you begin to learn philosophy, you need to know how to analyze philosophical ideas.
People put off reading this stuff because they don't know where to start and are afraid they will learn the 'wrong' way
READ and don't ever let anyone tell you how to read and don't ever let wisdom bring you down.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra is Nietzsche's most poetic/literary work, so much of its meaning comes from allegory and figurative language. If you don't already know what philosophical issues or which philosophers he's referring to indirectly, it can be tough to understand what points he's trying to make. Zarathustra would be a bad start for a beginner in philosophy because its main concern is not clear argumentation but poetic presentation. Read Twilight of the Idols instead since it's basically an overview of Nietzsche's biggest philosophical issues.
>>7456413
I'm doing a degree and I want to learn the wrong way.
Never read Nietzsche.
Which one of his books justifies killing people?
I want to get to the good stuff quick.
>>7456427
sorry bro hate to inform you but there is no right or wrong way
You could misrepresent him if u want
>>7456427
the idea of Nietzschean amoralism is that justification is a farcical concept; actions are products of physical necessity and any justification is a rationalization consequent to the act, either construed as a causal or moral statement but in any case based on irrational sentiment.
>>7456427
All of them besides birth of tragedy are great. You can't go wrong with Nietzsche, but don't expect to understand Zarathustra before reading his other shit. Pretty much everything besides Zarathustra is a fine starting point. If I could do it again, I'd probably read Twilight of the Idols first, but Genealogy of Morals was a good start.
>>7456410
I wish I could reach through the screen and slap you right in the ear.
