I didn't get it.
>>7769418
Dude water lmao
>>7769418
>lol dude theres like no truth man, only opinions
That book is shit, the fact that people here recommend it just shows how clueless this board is.
>my version has Socrates on the front
they had one job
>>7769631
>The Presocrarics and the Sophists
>and the Sophists
Socrates is right at home
>>7769631
>they had one job
>>>/reddit/
>>7769687
I do browse reddit
>>7769619
I agree that it wasn't the best of books. But then again there most of what we know of the presocratics is so scarce that they did the best they could.
>>7769691
REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>7769619
what would you recommend that's better?
>>7769691
REEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>7769691
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>7770078
Honestly, since we have so little of the Presocratics the best thing you can do is to read a lot of different interpretations and then come up with your own ideas. I'd suggest to just read the article about them on the Stanford Wiki and move on to Plato.
>>7769691
DELETE THIS
>>7769691
Normies leave.
>>7769691
reee
>>7769691
You know where the door is
>>7770410
sounds like the book is fine then
>>7769691
So you don't belong here.
>>7769418
What's not to understand?
They eschewed the elemental qualities of the pagan 'gods' of the Iliad, and instead relied on avatar-elements of their own choosing.
Sophists went one step further, eschewing both divine theories and elemental theories in favour of a materialistic consensus theory.
>>7770700
Kek exactly. I read it and it was fine.
>>7769619 I was going to cop a copy before reading this. What were your problems with the book?
>>7770922
Mr, Waterfield treats the Presocratics as empiricists, whose explicit knowledge must be analyzed in isolation instead of being the necessary development of the ideas and concepts of Philosophy. Hence key-word like 'distortion' or 'scientific' or 'obscure'. He is clueless.
>>7771098
keywords*
Just skip to plato
>>7769691
DELET
>>7771098
treating and homogenizing a group of philosophers so they fit into your trite narrative of HistoryofPhilosophy is much worse. presocratics were empiricists in the first sense of the word.
>>7771117
Read the works of Parmenides and Heraclitus before spouting this non-sense. How is the 'infinite' of Anaximander empirical?
>>7769418
Funny, I just finished that book. It wasn't difficult to understand at all. The major difficulty is that no one truly knows what the presocratics were saying.
>>7771117
Naturalism =/= empiricism.
>>7769691
>>7769691
>>7769691
Nice. Which dubs? I use r/Cuckfantasies, r/books, r/AsianMasculinity and r/JohnGreen
>>7771226
>he actually believes Bernie Panders is even vaguely marxist
Try posting corbyn next time
>>7771098
what do you think would be better than this book?
>>7771226
>you will never die and go to heaven and meet a frustrated Marx, and befriend him despite his waiting list of ten billion eager would-be revolutionaries trying to do the same
>you will never get shitfaced with a Marx who appreciates your ability to historicize him properly and recognize that his philosophy wasn't even consistent much less systematic
>you will never sit on some kind of ethereal couch with Marx as he leans slightly awkwardly on his shoulder and rambles semi-coherently about how his ATTEMPT at systemizing the depredations of capitalism was that important thing, but everyone keeps looking for systems within systems
>you will never wrap your arm around him and give him a big firm hug, your palm sinking into his shoulder, as you truly understand your new friend
>you will never watch capitalism die together, in some far-flung future where everything finally works out
>tfw you know Marx was probably just a really fun nice guy overall and you will never be his bud
I'm crying IRL now
I'm crying because of this post
I wish I could be Marx's friend
No one gets Marx except me
>>7771406
are ya one of them types what thinks they be woman yet ya be a man?
>>7771415
Maybe. Sometimes I think of Goddard's description of Shakespeare's gender ambiguity and I wonder whether I am some kind of gay genderless fish who exists to bring unity to the two halves of mankind. But I hate women. So I don't know.
I wish I could give the following people a big hug:
>Emile Durkheim
>Max Weber
>Mircea Eliade
>Friedrich Nietzsche
>Soren Kierkegaard
I wish I could give the following people a good slap:
>Emile Cioran
>Louis-Ferdinand Celine
>>7770078
I have a list I am sticking to. Books I liked and found to be informative starred.
* Early Greek Philosophy (Penguin)
* The First Philosophers (Oxford)
* The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy, Daniel W. Graham
* Philosophy Before Socrates, McKirahan
Heraclitus (Phoenix Presocratics Series)
Parmenides of Elea (Phoenix Presocratics Series)
Xenophanes of Colophon (Phoenix Presocratics Series)
The Atomists: Leucippus and Democritus (Phoenix Presocratics Series)
Anaxagoras of Clazomenae (Phoenix Presocratics Series)
Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Diels-Kranz
A Presocratics Reader Patricia Curd
The Older Sophists, Diels
The Presocratic Philosophers, Kirk, Raven
* The Art and Thought of Heraclitus
A History of Greek Philosophy, Guthrie
Philosophy in the Tragic Age of Greeks, Nietzsche
* Studies in Greek Philosophy, Vlastos
Anaximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology
The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, A. A. Long
Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy
>>7771372
I think this is a very good point. This is why people are usually pointed to Plato and Aristotle as a starting point
the fact that shit from the very beginning of history is still relevant in philosophy shows what a dumb project philosophy actually is
>>7771504
ur dum
>>7769677
Boo
>>7771504
the fact that shit from the very beginning of history is still relevant in geometry shows what a dumb project geometry actually is
>>7769677
Aristophanes go.
>>7771552
Socrates did use the dialectic that the Sophists made popular though, the difference being that he tried to keep his ends objective and not just particular feelings of the moment like them.
>>7770078
Just listen to lectures on the presocratics, a neophyte will not derive that much from reading them.
Heraclitus was the best of the presocratics and Socrates, who had the privilege of reading his book before it was lost to history, said this of it
"What I understood was fine, but I understood very little."
If fucking Socrates can't understand what the fuck is going on in that man's mind it's not likely you will.
>>7771728
Which lectures do you recommend?
>>7771547
don't mock me
>>7771406
>you will never watch capitalism die together, in some far-flung future where everything finally works out
IKTF
>>7770410
>the best thing you can do is to read a lot of different interpretations and then come up with your own ideas
how is this any better than reading the original fragments ?
really ?! reading others opinions ? looks like you are trying to self-indoctrinate to academic orthodoxy
>>7770839
Do you even logos?
>>7772540
Not op, but check out the History of philosophy without any gasps podcast on heraclitus
>>7771427
Gotta be sympathetic to Celine but. I mean he was a fascist and a louse but I don't think he had an easy life or anything. Just another symptom of capitalism.
>>7775861
>without any gasps
Kek
>>7771427
lasa-ma sa ghicesc ...?
>>7771406
That's how I feel about Hitler :(
how many marxists are in this thread right now?
I read Hamilton's Mythology and Magee's Story of Philosophy. I was going to jump into the Presocratics before going to Plato but this thread cast doubts in my approach.
Do I skip it or not?
>>7775861
PEL did Heraclitus better
fite me
>>7778386
>Hamilton's Mythology
If Plato/Socrates makes a particular mythological or religious reference you should use that book as a source to check it out and know why is he mentioning such and such God, but there is no need to read cover to cover first.
>>7778386
Sometimes, depending on the edition you're reading you won't even have to do that, those references will explained on footnotes.
>>7778741
fuck you
