I want to learn philosophy, /lit/ but I don't know how to start.
Recommend me a book that would be suitable for a complete beginner.
*I checked the wiki but I found nothing useful.
>>7664616
>I want to learn philosophy but I don't know how to start.
Gain a fundamental understanding of the concept of good and evil first. Read a religious text like the Bible. Or just the Ten Commandments.
>>7664619
I have already read the bible.
start with the greeks
There are no western philosophers that did not read the Greeks.
>>7664624
Is this a meme or a genuine advice?
If so, which greek philosopher should I start with?
Read this and just be done with all this shit. Or read the greeks.
Sophie's world
>>7664682
seconding this, had it for school, good overview
>>7664616
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/pub
>>7664619
Horrible advice. Beyond Good and Evil by Nietzsche is a relatively better starting place, you know, because the concept that good and evil has any validity is retarded.
OP I'd say read Being and Time, it is dense and full of jargon but with a little effort and a dictionary anybody can read it, and it is of significant quality.
Stuff that is usually rec'd for beginners isn't all that good and might even put you off. That book is medium level and shows you what philosophy can actually offer.
>>7664682
Sophie's World is a ridiculously shitty book in a lot of ways, but it does provide a solid base in the fundamentals of philosophy.
When you start with the Ancients, I would look into Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle, 4th Edition and Poetics by Aristotle.
Depends on what you mean by "learn philosophy." If you want a gist of what's what and who's who in the field, along with basic introductions to common concepts, read an overview, like some of those suggested in this thread (or Copleston's history of philosophy, or Durant's story of philosophy for a much briefer text).
If you want to totally inmerse yourself in it, start with the Greeks. The anon above posted the philosophy google doc; get started on that with basic Greek stuff (mythology, Homer), then waterfield's "first philosophers," then Plato and Aristotle.
How thoroughly you go is totally up to you. Many people only suggest 3-5 platonic dialogues before reading the Republic and moving on, but if you want to see the foundations of metaphysics and epistemology you'll need more than that.
Most important is to just get started. There's no use planning ahead to Kant if it's going to take you months to get through even a cursory investigation of the Greeks.
>>7664748
unnecesary, just pick a book that intrests you, honestly. it's fucking literature not empire biulding. for god's sake. read something modern first i would recomend, post 1900 at least. you dont need to see the fucking origins unless you DEVELOP an interest in them. ppl are retarded i swear. prob just autistic. who knoews.
>>7664802
>it's fucking literature not empire biulding
"no"
>>7664729
>Nietzsche
>starting place
fucking lmao, stop this meme please, only proto-normies start with him
>>7664682
>Sophie's world
This. This is what got me interested in philosophy back in the day. Beautiful book, and the perfect choice for a beginner.
>>7664616
"Invitation to philosophy" by Martin Hollis.
I recommend Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault
>>7664616
WHO
>>7664616
Elementary principles of philosophy by George Politzer
Here: bookzz.org
There you go, pal.
/thread
How to Build a Universe That Doesn't Fall Apart Two Days Later
by Philip K. Dick, 1978
http://deoxy.org/pkd_how2build.htm
>>7664822
>projection
lmao
>>7664875
Also:
FREEDOM IS A TWO-EDGED SWORD
by Fra. Belarion, O.T.O. (Jack Parsons)
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bb/babalon210.htm
Can't speak for philosophy in general, but if you're interested in western political philosophy, start with Machiavelli -> Hobbes -> Locke -> Rousseau and keep going from there.
>>7664915
>reading Machiavelli without reading Livy who ostensibly inspired him and Polybius who ultimately dictated much of Machiavelli's underlying theories
>reading Livy and Polybius without reading Plato who inspired them
>reading Plato without reading the pre-Socratics who shaped much of his thought, if only by their contrary nature
Do you see how this works?
>>7664962
I figured Thucydides would be assumed.
Actually I recently met a guy taking a class in grad school which consisted of reading Thucydides and then Machiaveli's Discourses to connect the two. Cool stuff. I was envious.
>>7664633
It's a complete meme, just watch 13 hours of zizek videos and you'll answer your own question
>>7664959
no. stop this retardation.
>>7664616
Don't listen to these fuckers namedropping and baiting Nietzsche and Heidegger for beginning. Start with Aristotle / Plato, move on to postmodern (Foucault, Levinas) to trace their influences and decide where to go deeper, be it ethics, aesthetics, whatheverthefucknot.
In addition to The Republic, I'd recommend:
Plato's Apology of Socrates
Jean-Jacques Rousseau - The Social Contract (selected passages, probably)
Book XI of Augustine's Confessions
Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics
However, The Republic is definitely the best starting place, since Plato is easy to read yet the book's scope is very wide-ranging.
Nietzsche is most likely not a good place to start unless you have a philosophy professor to guide you through it.
>>7664616
just consult plato, aristotle and the enlightenmennt philosophers
>>7664729
Someone who recommends starting with Nietzsche is someone who doesn't understand Nietzsche.
Pretty much the only thing everyone will agree on is that you wouldn't be wrong to start with Plato. Literally no respected philosopher doesn't have respect for Plato, even if they think that ultimately he was wrong. So basically you can either guess about who you should start with and pick someone like Kant or Wittgenstein like people are suggesting, or you can start with the person literally all those people would have started with. The classics are classics for a reason.
Let me put it another way: anyone who was anyone agreed that Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine are worth reading.
Personally I think Aquinas is probably the most solid philosopher out there; he is probably the best interpreter of Aristotle you can find, and he also brought together Aristotelian and Platonic thought in a way no one before him ever had. Something like "Aquinas" by Ed Feser is a good introduction (reading Aquinas directly without any previous knowledge of him is almost impossible, if only because of the scholastic terminology).
>>7664915
Do you honestly think Western political philosophy started in the Renaissance? Why is there no Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas or Suárez in that list?
>>7665125
Agree
Also "Hobbes -> Locke -> Rousseau", their "philosophy" resulted in most of 20th century conflicts including both world wars. Just saying...
>>7664616
Read fiction.
>>7664959
>>7664962
>>7665125
If you're on this board, I'm going to assume you've already read Plato and Aquinas. Is that too unfair? Anyone who has graduated fucking high school has read the Republic.
>>7665141
Whether you agree with the philosophy or not is immaterial. It's still essential reading for a westerner.
>>7665191
>I want to learn philosophy, /lit/ but I don't know how to start.
>Recommend me a book that would be suitable for a complete beginner.
Yeah, I've read the Republic. But I have a philosophy degree and a parent with an ABD in philosophy. Most people haven't read Plato in high school, in fact hardly anyone has. What class do you think they'd have read it in? All those philosophy classes high schools offer? High schools are too busy making kids read whatever latest trans-racial-post-gender-queer-marxist-feminist novel to bother with anything as lame as Plato.
What about this?
>>7665218
I suppose I'm a bit biased in this sense. Growing up, my dad had a PhD in Political Theory and Thought, and my mom - a judge - had a law degree. My parents understood the importance of a good education and (as I've only recently learned) nearly starved themselves to send my brother and me to a very good private school.
Luckily, I avoided the brainwashing hell that's apparently the public school system. The Republic was a required reading for a sophomore history class when I was in high school.
I didn't mean to come off as pretentious - I actually thought it was common high school reading material.
>>7665233
Are you new? We talked about this at length already.
>>7664616
Anthony Kenny, A New History of Western Philosophy
>>7664623
simply ebin
>>7665234
what do you do now, anon?
>>7665293
I'm in school studying pure maths and political science. I intend to go to law school.
After my mom had worked for the state enough years to get a nice pension, she retired and started a law firm. Because of her reputation, business is good. After I graduate, I'll work for her until I inherit the business.
My brother is a computer scientist who works for microsoft - I don't know the details of his work, but he does well for himself.
>>7665233
Out of all the people who are famous for their grasp of the history of philosophy, Russell is the most deserving of his lack of fame.
>>7665280
>dismissing a 1000 years of philosophy because you can't be assed to actually educate yourself
What are you, an Enlightenment thinker? How incredibly passé.
>>7665317
sounds nice, I wish you good luck!
>>7665350
Thank you, anon. I wish you good luck with your life too.
>>7665191
>only read the Republic
>has read Plato
Pick one faggot. Nobody specifically said "the republic" in a post you quoted, and if you've only read Republic and honestly believe that's "enough" Plato then you've ironically proved yourself wrong.
>>7665543
There's a big tome on my shelf, literally 4 feet from where I currently sit, which has a big old "COLLECTED DIALOGUES OF PLATO" on the cover, which I have read cover to cover more times than I care to remember.
In the context of political philosophy (which is what we were talking about before you chimed in, if you had cared at all to read), Republic is an essential.
The point I was trying to make is that Republic, which is Plato's key contribution to the western political philosophy canon, is something most high schoolers (or so I thought) read before graduating high school.
Nowhere at all did I say it was the only dialogue I had read.
Perhaps you should exercise some of those reading comprehension skills that I'm sure you learned in public school.
Have a nice day :)
>>7664729
Anon's point is you have to start at good and evil to understand the historical significance (and modern relevance) of Beyond Good and Evil
>>7664860
/threading your own post. Look man, for your sake and ours, you need to stop being a faggot
what is the question that interest you that lead you to wanting to read philosophy?
>>7665594
How do I live a good life?
I'm interested in virtue ethics.
>>7664616
Just start here
>>7666093
>How do I live a good life?
healthy diet, sports and pic related
Jacques Maritain - Degrees of Knowledge
Etienne Gilson - Being and Some Philosophers
>>7666093
Definitely read the Greeks then.
Read Homer, Plato, Aristotle, and Plutarch.
>>7666093
read the Imitation of Christ
>>7666258
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/imitation/imitation.html
