How do I start with the greeks(for philosophy).I made this thread because there are too many guides with completely different books and I dont know which one is the best one.
bumpe
>>1307467
Just start reading you moron Jesus Christ
>>1307655
>just read
Read what you mongoloid?I dont want not miss/misunderstand something and read everything properly in general.
>>1307665
If you want to read Greek philosophy then just start reading it. Doesn't really matter if you understand, it's not relevant to any modern philosophy anyway. If you want to learn philosophy, then don;t start with the Greeks, start with a modern writer like Russel.
>>1307700
Are you sure because whatever I read EVERYONE tells you that you need to read the greeks before anything else unironically .
>>1307467
Skip most of the pre-socratics, there are so many interpretations because we lack the original texts. Read about Heraclitus and Parmenides though, they were the ones that set the problem that philosophy is all about, the problem of synthesizing changeful diversity with fixed unity, one required by the senses and the other required by thought.
Then take a look on the focus of definitions by Socrates and how that started to be ontologically loaded with Plato's theory of forms. Then read all of Aristotle and his rebuttal to Plato's theory, he's the one that defined everything pretty much.
The history of philosophy is basically a footnote of the battle between Plato and Aristotle.
>>1307731
People are idiots, how have you not learned this yet? If you wanted to study art, would you start with the Lascaux cave paintings? No, you'd jump right in with whatever particular area of art most appeals to you, the same is true for philosophy. Find an area of philosophy you like, and read about it. That will inevitably lead you to another area, and so on and on until before you know it, you've become well-read in philosophy. There is no "shortcut", and there is no "correct" order to read this shit, just dive right in and find your preferred depth.
>>1307777
Everything the Greeks came up with that was useful or true has been elaborated upon by later thinkers. Reading the Greeks is fine if you already know philosophy, it's cool to see how soon some of the great ideas of the discipline were originated, but if you don't know how to read philosophy and just dive in to the Greeks, you will end up believing a lot of wrong, stupid and outdated things. It's like if you wanted to learn physics and started with Alhazren or Newton, those writers are interesting for a physicist to read but would be hopelessly confusing and misleading for a novice.
>>1307820
While what you say is true for most disciplines, it's not the case with philosophy. Context adds a lot to the understanding of philosophical ideas, it's not really advisable to see philosophical theories in a vacuum.
Try reading Kant's Critique without knowing anything about Hume or the mechanistic science of the time. It's impossible.
>>1307820
There are so many overt references to the Greeks with nearly every philosopher though. Granted you don't need to read everything the Greeks ever did but a background in Plato and Aristotle at the very least is pretty essential. Most philosophers form their stances by critiques of the works of previous ones. You don't need to read every philosopher ever to understand their works, but the amount of influence Plato and Aristotle had on western ideas cannot be understated.
>>1307467
If you want an overview go and listen to the history of philosophy without any gaps podcast. From that, listen to someone else about books.
read plato's dialogues first
>>1307467
Pick up copies of The Republic, Nicomachean Ethics and The Histories and just leaf around
>>1308960
first?
>>1307467
OP, this will tell you everything you need to know: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1
Plato and Aristotle, OP. They're not too complicated, and pretty much every philosopher since them has been influenced by one or the other.
