I want to go through a chronological reading of philosophy's progression.
What do I read after the greeks? Is there some kind of flowchart I can follow?
>>7974867
Restart with the Romans.
>>7974867
Skip the Chileans.
>>7974895
It's Resume with the Romans, newfag
>>7974867
Unless you're some kind of autistic genius, this is a really bad way to read philosophy. Just to get a comprehensive idea of a single thinker could take you a full semester at college, to get through all the philosophers would take you years doing little else - and note that this is hard, technical, dry stuff. Most of it won't be even relevant or the slightest convincing to you.
Read a couple of overviews of the entire history of philosophy and then focus on whatever caught your interest the most. You probably won't even get to the second step before you've satisfied whatever draws you to philosophy.
I'm interested in Epistemology as a branch of philosophy. Do you know any good books to start from? I just want to get a very very basic idea of all the different philosophical movements of epistemology and then decide if I want to study any particular of them that I find more interesting more deeply.
>>7974867
Homer – Iliad, Odyssey
The Old Testament
Aeschylus – Tragedies
Sophocles – Tragedies
Herodotus – Histories
Euripides – Tragedies
Thucydides – History of the Peloponnesian War
Hippocrates – Medical Writings
Aristophanes – Comedies
Plato – Dialogues
Aristotle – Works
Epicurus – Letter to Herodotus; Letter to Menoecus
Euclid – Elements
Archimedes – Works
Apollonius of Perga – Conic Sections
Cicero – Works
Lucretius – On the Nature of Things
Virgil – Works
Horace – Works
Livy – History of Rome
Ovid – Works
Plutarch – Parallel Lives; Moralia
Tacitus – Histories; Annals; Agricola Germania
Nicomachus of Gerasa – Introduction to Arithmetic
Epictetus – Discourses; Encheiridion
Ptolemy – Almagest
Lucian – Works
Marcus Aurelius – Meditations
Galen – On the Natural Faculties
The New Testament
Plotinus – The Enneads
St. Augustine – On the Teacher; Confessions; City of God; On Christian Doctrine
The Song of Roland
The Nibelungenlied
The Saga of Burnt Njál
St. Thomas Aquinas – Summa Theologica
Dante Alighieri – The Divine Comedy;The New Life; On Monarchy
Geoffrey Chaucer – Troilus and Criseyde; The Canterbury Tales
Leonardo da Vinci – Notebooks
Niccolò Machiavelli – The Prince; Discourses on the First Ten Books of Livy
Desiderius Erasmus – The Praise of Folly
Nicolaus Copernicus – On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres
Thomas More – Utopia
Martin Luther – Table Talk; Three Treatises
François Rabelais – Gargantua and Pantagruel
John Calvin – Institutes of the Christian Religion
Michel de Montaigne – Essays
William Gilbert – On the Loadstone and Magnetic Bodies
Miguel de Cervantes – Don Quixote
Edmund Spenser – Prothalamion; The Faerie Queene
Francis Bacon – Essays; Advancement of Learning; Novum Organum, New Atlantis
William Shakespeare – Poetry and Plays
Galileo Galilei – Starry Messenger; Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences
Johannes Kepler – Epitome of Copernican Astronomy; Concerning the Harmonies of the World
William Harvey – On the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals; On the Circulation of the Blood; On the Generation of Animals
Thomas Hobbes – Leviathan
René Descartes – Rules for the Direction of the Mind; Discourse on the Method; Geometry; Meditations on First Philosophy
John Milton – Works
Molière – Comedies
Blaise Pascal – The Provincial Letters; Pensees; Scientific Treatises
Christiaan Huygens – Treatise on Light
Benedict de Spinoza – Ethics
John Locke – Letter Concerning Toleration; Of Civil Government; Essay Concerning Human Understanding; Thoughts Concerning Education
>>7976336
Jean Baptiste Racine – Tragedies
Isaac Newton – Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy; Optics
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz – Discourse on Metaphysics; New Essays Concerning Human Understanding; Monadology
Daniel Defoe – Robinson Crusoe
Jonathan Swift – A Tale of a Tub; Journal to Stella; Gulliver's Travels; A Modest Proposal
William Congreve – The Way of the World
George Berkeley – Principles of Human Knowledge
Alexander Pope – Essay on Criticism; Rape of the Lock; Essay on Man
Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu – Persian Letters; Spirit of Laws
Voltaire – Letters on the English; Candide; Philosophical Dictionary
Henry Fielding – Joseph Andrews; Tom Jones
Samuel Johnson – The Vanity of Human Wishes; Dictionary; Rasselas; The Lives of the Poets
David Hume – Treatise on Human Nature; Essays Moral and Political; An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
Jean-Jacques Rousseau – On the Origin of Inequality; On the Political Economy; Emile – or, On Education, The Social Contract
Laurence Sterne – Tristram Shandy; A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy
Adam Smith – The Theory of Moral Sentiments; The Wealth of Nations
Immanuel Kant – Critique of Pure Reason; Fundamental Principles of the Metaphysics of Morals; Critique of Practical Reason; The Science of Right; Critique of Judgment; Perpetual Peace
Edward Gibbon – The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire; Autobiography
James Boswell – Journal; Life of Samuel Johnson, Ll.D.
Antoine Laurent Lavoisier – Traité Élémentaire de Chimie (Elements of Chemistry)
Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison – Federalist Papers
Jeremy Bentham – Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation; Theory of Fictions
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe – Faust; Poetry and Truth
Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier – Analytical Theory of Heat
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel – Phenomenology of Spirit; Philosophy of Right; Lectures on the Philosophy of History
William Wordsworth – Poems
Samuel Taylor Coleridge – Poems; Biographia Literaria
Jane Austen – Pride and Prejudice; Emma
Carl von Clausewitz – On War
Stendhal – The Red and the Black; The Charterhouse of Parma; On Love
Lord Byron – Don Juan
Arthur Schopenhauer – Studies in Pessimism
Michael Faraday – Chemical History of a Candle; Experimental Researches in Electricity
Charles Lyell – Principles of Geology
Auguste Comte – The Positive Philosophy
Honoré de Balzac – Père Goriot; Eugenie Grandet
Ralph Waldo Emerson – Representative Men; Essays; Journal
Nathaniel Hawthorne – The Scarlet Letter
Alexis de Tocqueville – Democracy in America
John Stuart Mill – A System of Logic; On Liberty; Representative Government; Utilitarianism; The Subjection of Women; Autobiography
Charles Darwin – The Origin of Species; The Descent of Man; Autobiography
Charles Dickens – Pickwick Papers; David Copperfield; Hard Times
>>7976339
Claude Bernard – Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine
Henry David Thoreau – Civil Disobedience; Walden
Karl Marx – Capital; Communist Manifesto
George Eliot – Adam Bede; Middlemarch
Herman Melville – Moby-Dick; Billy Budd
Fyodor Dostoevsky – Crime and Punishment; The Idiot; The Brothers Karamazov
Gustave Flaubert – Madame Bovary; Three Stories
Henrik Ibsen – Plays
Leo Tolstoy – War and Peace; Anna Karenina; What is Art?; Twenty-Three Tales
Mark Twain – The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; The Mysterious Stranger
William James – The Principles of Psychology; The Varieties of Religious Experience; Pragmatism; Essays in Radical Empiricism
Henry James – The American; The Ambassadors
Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche – Thus Spoke Zarathustra; Beyond Good and Evil; The Genealogy of Morals; The Will to Power
Jules Henri Poincaré – Science and Hypothesis; Science and Method
Sigmund Freud – The Interpretation of Dreams; Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis; Civilization and Its Discontents; New Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis
George Bernard Shaw – Plays and Prefaces
Max Planck – Origin and Development of the Quantum Theory; Where Is Science Going?; Scientific Autobiography
Henri Bergson – Time and Free Will; Matter and Memory; Creative Evolution; The Two Sources of Morality and Religion
John Dewey – How We Think; Democracy and Education; Experience and Nature; Logic: the Theory of Inquiry
Alfred North Whitehead – An Introduction to Mathematics; Science and the Modern World; The Aims of Education and Other Essays; Adventures of Ideas
George Santayana – The Life of Reason; Skepticism and Animal Faith; Persons and Places
Vladimir Lenin – The State and Revolution
Marcel Proust – Remembrance of Things Past
Bertrand Russell – The Problems of Philosophy; The Analysis of Mind; An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth; Human Knowledge, Its Scope and Limits
Thomas Mann – The Magic Mountain; Joseph and His Brothers
Albert Einstein – The Meaning of Relativity; On the Method of Theoretical Physics; The Evolution of Physics
James Joyce – 'The Dead' in Dubliners; A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man; Ulysses
Jacques Maritain – Art and Scholasticism; The Degrees of Knowledge; The Rights of Man and Natural Law; True Humanism
Franz Kafka – The Trial; The Castle
Arnold J. Toynbee – A Study of History; Civilization on Trial
Jean-Paul Sartre – Nausea; No Exit; Being and Nothingness
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn – The First Circle; The Cancer Ward
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjpbX0XZ76T2suXhHqGkINqzAhE4dknQB
https://archive.org/details/historyofphiloso007974mbp
>>7976326
the wheaton course covers epistemology chronologically
>>7976326
Literally every major philosopher has some kind of epistemology, and usually it fits together with everything else they think. For example to Plato and the later Heidegger the good, the beautiful and the true are the same.
In other words, you might as well just pick up an overview on the history of philosophy. AFAIK: Anthony Kenny's books are good if you want accuracy and don't mind being bored, Bertrand Russell for a very entertaining, but highly biased and rickety treatment.
If you don't care about the history of philosophy and just want to read about the problems and proposed solutions, almost like a math book, you could try something like An Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge by Noah Lemos.
>>7976342
This list makes no sense, imo. There is lots of scientific texts and literature in it with little relevance to philosophy, but there are random things lacking with great importance to philosophy - like the pre-socratics. And why is Being and Nothingness there and not Being and Time, on which it builds on???
>>7974867
It's not really necessary to read chronologically. Most academics won't have read even close to every philosopher. There are tenured dudes who have never even read the Critique of Pure Reason. Only specialists or people with a personal interest will read anything that falls between Aristotle and Descartes.
>>7976397
>why is Being and Nothingness there and not Being and Time, on which it builds on?
It's a "1000 books to read before you die" list for dilettantes. That's why.
off topic but did anything come of that greek language thread, ive got the hansen & quinn book
>>7974867
I don't know. I just wanted to post this picture.
(-380) Plato: "Republic"
(-340) Aristotle: "Nicomachean Ethics"
(400) Augustine: "Confessions"
(1274) Aquinas: "Summa Theologica"
(1620) Bacon: "Novum Organum"
(1641) Descartes: "Meditations on First Philosophy"
(1651) Hobbes: "Leviathan"
(1677) Spinoza: "Ethics, Demonstrated in Geometrical Order"
(1689) Locke: "Two Treatises of Government"
(1690) Locke: "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding"
(1704) Leibniz: "New Essays on Human Understanding"
(1710) Berkeley: "A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge"
(1739) Hume: "A Treatise of Human Nature"
(1748) Hume: "An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding"
(1762) Rousseau: "The Social Contract"
(1781) Kant: "Critique of Pure Reason"
(1785) Kant: "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals"
(1818) Schopenhauer: "The World as Will and Representation"
(1859) Mill: "On Liberty"
(1863) Mill: "Utilitarianism"
(1874) Sidgwick: "The Methods of Ethics"
(1884) Frege: "The Foundations of Arithmetic"
(1886) Nietzsche: "Beyond Good and Evil"
(1887) Nietzsche: "On the Genealogy of Morality"
(1890) James: "The Principles of Psychology"
(1892) Frege: "On Sense and Reference"
(1899) Peirce: "Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce"
(1903) Moore: "Principia Ethica"
(1907) James: "Pragmatism"
(1919) Russell: "Introduction to Mathematical Philosophy"
(1922) Wittgenstein: "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus"
(1928) Carnap: "The Logical Structure of the World"
(1934) Popper: "The Logic of Scientific Discovery"
(1936) Ayer: "Language, Truth and Logic"
(1949) Ryle: "The Concept of Mind"
(1953) Wittgenstein: "Philosophical Investigations"
(1955) Goodman: "Fact, Fiction, and Forecast"
(1960) Quine: "Word and Object"
(1962) Kuhn: "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions"
(1962) Austin: "How to Do Things with Words"
(1963) Popper: "Conjectures and Refutations"
(1965) Hempel: "Aspects of Scientific Explanation"
(1971) Rawls: "A Theory of Justice"
(1972) Kripke: "Naming and Necessity"
(1974) Nozick: "Anarchy, State and Utopia"
(1975) Fodor: "The Language of Thought"
(1975) Putnam: "Mind, Language and Reality"
(1979) Nagel: "Mortal Questions"
(1979) Rorty: "Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature"
(1980) Davidson: "Essays on Actions and Events"
(1981) Putnam: "Reason, Truth, and History"
(1981) Dretske: "Knowledge and the Flow of Information"
(1981) Nozick: "Philosophical Explanations"
(1982) Evans: "Varieties of Reference"
(1983) Lewis: "Philosophical Papers"
(1983) Searle: "Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind"
(1984) Parfit: "Reasons and Persons"
(1984) MacIntyre: "After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory"
(1985) Williams: "Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy"
(1986) Nagel: "The View From Nowhere"
(1986) Goldman: "Epistemology and Cognition"
(1993) Singer: "Practical Ethics"
(2000) Williamson: "Knowledge and Its Limits"
(2008) Quine: "Quintessence"
>>7976763
where did you get this list? good list.
>>7976774
I made it myself just now.
>>7976793
well, good selection. missing a little Kierkegaard imo, but i still think it incorporates a lot of important philosophical ideas neatly
>>7976800
Yeah, I left out Hegel and Kierkegaard due to text field constraints (and because I don't find them very useful).
Has anyone else read this book? As introductory material I really liked it.
>>7976763
Any particular reason Kierkegaard isn't in that list?
>>7976811
Excuse my etiquette, didn't finish the thread
>>7976339
>Fourier
Are you memeing right now
>>7976837
Originally I included 'Fear and Trembling', but deleted it so the list could fit in a single post.
>>7974895
Great way to learn about Roman ideology.
If you want philosophy the next step is Christianity, particularly Jesus and the NT, and the following tradition until the Enlightenment. For the broader picture you need to look into Buddhism and ancient oriental traditions.
The biggest mistake is thinking religion, history, and literature are not part of philosophy. You need all of them to understand and demystify any of it.
>>7976763
>Four books before Bacon
>One of them is the entire Summa
>Confessions not City of God
Are you fucking kidding me anon?
>>7977252
It just includes the highlights. To be honest, most philosophers never even crack open Augustine or Aquinas. Unless you're a theist, most of what they wrote is not going to be useful.
>>7976811
Kierkegaard not useful. Into the trash it goes.
>>7975077
Mediocre faggot.
>>7974867
Intending to make this into a flowchart in a second, but basically:
Presocratics -> Plato -> Aristotle -> Epicurus -> Cicero -> Letters From a Stoic -> Marcus Aurelius
Bible -> Saint Augustine
Saint Augustine + Aristotle -> Thomas Aquinas -> Martin Luther -> Descartes -> Hume -> Kant -> Hegel
Hegel -> Feuerbach -> Marx/Engels
Hegel -> Kierkegaard -> Heidegger
Marx/Engels + Heidegger -> Sartre + Beauvoir
Kierkegaard -> Dostoyevsky -> Nietzsche
Also, at some point read Albert Camus, Wittgenstein, and Mary Wollstonecraft. None of them really fit into any kind of chart, though.
>>7974867
Classical- Presocratics, Plato, Aristotle,Zeno of Citium, Democritus Plotinus
Medieval- Augustine, Avicenna, Al-Ghazali Aquinas, Duns Scotus, Ockham
( Its absolutely insane that people miss out on everyone but Aquinas and Augustine here. Especially since the early moderns are so derivative of Scotus and Ockham in so many ways. Avicenna is incredibly important for Renaissance, and Ghazali is the forefather of Hume when it comes to causation.)
Early Modern- Descartes,Leibniz, Spinoza, Berkely, Locke, Hume
German Idealism and related: Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Bradley
Early Analytic and related: Peirce, Frege, Russell, G.E. Moore, Carnap, Whtehead
Later and Post Analytic: Quine,Wittgenstein, Anscombe, Prior, Kripke, Lewis,
Continental: Bergson, Husserl, Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, Baudrillard
>>7977617
>Epicurus
>No Lucretius
>>7976750
it is probably more valuable than all the other posts in this thread
follow kenny's history of philsophy, read it as a primer and then actually read the people mentioned/analysed if they're sound interesting to you
for western stuff anyway
>>7978518
What the hell is that, anon? Do I look like I want to fuck a daddy long legs?
>>7978472
This is by far the best list given in this thread. People who think nothing happened in philosophy between Augustine and Descartes (at most they'll namecheck Aquinas, but knowing nothing about him, will assign the entire fucking Summa) shouldn't be making lists in the first place.
Nice work anon.
>>7977293
Existentialism is vital for any thinking human being, even if you don't agree with Kierkegaard's specific conclusions.
>>7974867
Why? If you want to actually do philosophy, this is pretty clearly a mistake, as a couple other people have pointed out. Much better to spend a lot of time on a few texts than to get through all of even the most important philosophy chronologically. Once you find something you get really interested in (maybe that will be something written by the ancients, but not necessarily), try to write some paper(s) about it, trying to get clear about how the argument works, or where you think it goes wrong, or how it can answer some obvious objection that's not addressed in the text. Depth is much more important than breadth.
And if you want, fill the major gaps in your knowledge by reading overview articles and books about the relevant periods/topics.
If you don't want to actually do philosophy or engage with it in a rigorous way, and you just want to have a good understanding of Western thought, the overview articles and books are probably enough.
>>7979267
Nah, Medieval is eminently skippable. Which is why it is usually skipped.
>>7981234
This is, of course, correct. But /lit/ doesn't care about anything beyond regurgitating memes.
anyone else sad the days of cute young zoey are over
Blunt bangs and dark hair = hnnnnnggg
![567610[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/7vyfkmx.jpg "567610[1].jpg")
>>7979095
>>7976377
That guy just copy+pasted from the recommended reading appendix of "How to Read a Book".
I'd recommend you pick up a copy if you want to get the most out of those works
>>7981234
Sometimes the text you are interested in demands you to to have at least a passing familiarity with the ancients though; I'm personally draw to Hegelian logic, so I'm going through Plato right now to get used to his dialectics, and even then it's obviously not enough.
>>7976742
No one has made threads. We need threads. If you have greek pictures make threads. I think many are people are like you and are just waiting for people to make the first mood (I.e. Are little bitches)
>>7976763
No boethius or st. Anselm; topkek m8
>>7977272
Augustine's pre-Christian life is as interesting and essential as kierkergaard's
This is the answer
>>7976339
>>7976336
>>7976342
>Jane Austen
>George Eliot
You were doing so well, trolling women by not having a single solitary woman on the list at a glance - and then you had to drop Austen. Then I thought to take another look and found Eliot.
If these are in fact the only two women on the list, consider removing them just to shiv any women who may read the list in the future.
It also kinda shivs brown people I guess, an added bonus, but they're getting payback these days so meh. Still, it (the list) is a compelling case that dead white guys wrote most everything that actually matters.
>>7979267
Thanks. I'm lucky that my university gives proper exposure to all periods in history of philosophy.
>>7981256
It really isn't though, and serious historians of Philosophy don't skip it these days. Same with historians of Science ( see the Merton Calculators, Jean Buridan and Nicole Oresme especially for what was the prelude to the scientific revolution). The idea is that Scholasticism was all just Aristotle + Theology, but this is nonsense when Scotus and Ockham moved away from the Aristotelianism represented by Thomas Aquinas in so many important ways that set the stage for future philosophy. If we wanted to get really precise we would read Suarez as well to show how you get from Ockham and Scotus to Locke and Leibniz. The idea that looking into the roots of early modern empiricism and nominalism is extraneous seems absurd to me.
>>7976342
4 by Bergson, 3 by Santayana, 4 by Maritain
0 Frege
0 Sidgwick
0 Peirce
0 Wittgenstein
0 Moore
I realize this list is from 1940, so Adler couldn't have had as much perspective on late 19th and early 20th century philosophy as we do. But this is still embarrassing.
(Oh wait, just looked this up, apparently it's from the 1972 edition! lol, what a fuckup. Add to the list 0 Ryle, Austin, Anscombe, Ayer, Quine, Carnap, Strawson, Hare, Rawls, Popper, Kuhn, Sellars. Also 0 Grice and Kripke, though that's forgivable since their lectures hadn't been published in book form yet.)
>>7983631
>and serious historians of Philosophy don't skip it these days. Same with historians of Science
Sure, but there's a difference between Philosophy (or Science) and History of Philosophy (or History of Science). A professor might briefly mention Oresme in physics class, or math class, or philosophy of mind class, but he will not be delving deeply into the primary sources. History is best studied in History classes.
>>7974867
Check out the podcast called the history of philosophy without any gaps
>>7974867
HOW COULD
SOMETHING
SO FAIR
BE SO CRUEL
>>7983750
Op said that they wanted to
>go through a chronological reading of philosophy's progression.
Philosophy of history requires that we critically examine why historical figures thought what they did imo, so you have to really engage.
Though Medieval Metaphysics, Philosophy or Religion, Epistemology, Ethics etc has the advantage over Medieval science that allot of the medieval positions are still live options ( Ockham's Nominalism and Scotus' concept of Haecceity are two examples that we can all over the place in contemporary analytic Philosophy).
>>7976763
>Analytics
Haha, oh wow.
>>7976342
>Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" without "Sein und Zeit" (Heidegger)
Are you, by any chance, a dialectical materialist?
>>7974867
As you have not surpassed classical greek thought in all its forms and auras, I believe that you will always digress into more degenerate reads.
>>7984181
lmao.
Don't kid yourself, man. We're still dealing with the same shit Plato was. Sure we have fancier toys, but when it comes to the real questions, if anything we've regressed since Plato.
>>7983536
Stop worrying about filling quotas, faggot.
