>>8058486
you can't unironically start with the greeks.

it must be done ironically.

>>8058486
Sophocles comes before Plato. Also, Hesiod should be after Homer

It doesn't have to be any exact order. It's not like it's going to intellectually ruin you

Homer
Hesiod
Herodotus
Pindar
Thucydides
Xenophon
Aeschylus
Sophocles
Euripides
The Presocratics and the Sophists
Aristophanes
Plato
Aristotle
Epicurus

>>8058509
Where does Sappho fit into this succession? I know there's not much left, but I've heard what we do have is beautiful any very much worth it.

The Greeks were smart for their time, but they're pretty useless today, and the only reason people still read them is that humanities departments are nostalgiafags who would argue Super Mario 64 is STILL the best game of all time, STILL the best game to play today. Really? Really? You would rather play SM64 than Uncharted 4? You would? Fine, we'll lock you in a room with N64 games for a year and see how much fun you have. They're blurry, for crying out loud, not to mention the low poly count. Really?

Well I'd say read Hesiod and Homer, then go on to the Preoscratics, the Sophists, Plato and Aristotle. Also use a philosophy manual to geet your bearings and understand why someone like Parmenides or Gorgias is important. Don't know much about play writers or poets, so I'll bow to the above recs.

But in the end, >>8058496 is right

>>8058559
Cool bait, I like it

>>8058486
If I were you, I'd read The Epic of Gilgamesh before I even touch the greeks.