Say you actually do start with the Greeks:

Say you actually do start with the Greeks:

Does it imply that you have to read literally everything from Plato, then proceed to literally everything from Aristotle, and so forth, or is the meme merely suggesting to read the most important works by each?

The Greeks are just a natural starting point. Read the Republic and maybe a collection of Plato's other Dialogues. Then Nicomachean Ethics. Then maybe the Illiad and Odyssey.

What a trash order.

Start with the Romans

This is so utterly wrong. Aristotle's Organon, Physics and Metaphysics are far more important for the western tradition as a whole. Ethics is great but there are many contemporary virtue ethicists so you can get the general idea, but you need to read in order to get into metaphysics like a real man.

I like penis in my asshole

In that case, see Plato

Don’t read Aristotle. He is ancient Peterson

What greek works do I need to read Nietzsche?

Iliad, Odyssey, then Herodotus, Thucydides, then the Republic
it's not that hard lads

wait... starting with The Greeks doesnt mean pic related?

Philosophy builds on each other. You pretty much can't (effectivly) read important works without reading everything before it.

Why do they not write in such a way as to not require that? For what gain do philosophers have when they cost the reader not just the sticker price but precious time? Can they not simply write their arguments and observations in such a way that they stand on their own?

because they didn't write for plebs like you

lol. In Italy they start teaching the greeks since 7 years old.

just ask for the chart OP, we are not going to mock you.

How else would they justify being losers with no real world assets than by being overly complicated and elitist?

Bump

Regarding the chart, is there a partcular reason for Paul Roche's translations of Sophocles?

Ethics shouldn't be read for the tradition, even though you're ignoring the importance it played in theology. It should be read because it's genuinely great life advice, and also has a beautiful justification of philosophy itself.

Then who do they write for? What purpose is philosophy if not to better humanity through new understanding? Your statement leads to agreement with in that they have lost this way, and write to craft an illusion of performing good work in an attempt to gain status. If one has done their work properly and come to some new conclusion then they would seek to spread their ideas, both for the aforementioned aid to mankind and the critique of many eyes.

Listen guys if you are going to be like this, just go to Veeky Forums or /pol/. It's more your speed.

The latter is the part where you start, and the former is something you should return to. Reading all of Aristotle to get into philosophy is really, really terrible advice.
Also, modern philosophy doesn't rely on the ancient greeks nearly as much as people who would say you need to start with them would suggest. You can honestly start with Descartes and not have much trouble with anyone up to Kant. Sure, you'll find basic content from the greeks like substance or essence vs accidents or deduction, but not a lot of actual responding to the greeks, rather than just using notions from them they took for granted, and which we still basically take for granted.

The greeks are more worth reading just because of how damn good they are. Socrates lived the most amazing life ever, Plato is straight beautiful literature and Aristotle makes such an elaborate and improved system on Plato's content. And outside of those three the presocratics are really interesting and the hellenic period philosophers have really great practical philosophy.

>the Organon
BAHAHAHA! That's like reading Paracelsus or Albertus Magnus over a modern Chemistry textbook.

Funny thing is you keep on proving the point that it's a dick measurement contest.

Thankfully people like you get the treatment they deserve from society at large.

Neck yourself you dumb, ignorant idiot.

Aristotle is the greatest mind that ever lived, and his "mistakes" are worth reading a hundred times more than modern "successes", for they set the whole of western science and philosophy in motion.

I was actually start with that mythology first, really gives you the grasp of everything.

The Republic is Plato's least important work. No idea why Veeky Forums meme it so much, it's pretty shitty too.

The pre-socratics, the sophists, and most importantly all the greek tragedies.

Not true at all.

Republic is the most important book, followed by Laws or Timaeus.

Commentators closest to plato’s time said the republic encompassed his whole philosophy. Others only took on certain aspects. Cut your fucking throat. Not really, obviously. But feel bad about yourself at least

I wanted to read the Greeks to understand the references in poetry and to work on reading the western canon. I started with a comprehensive book on Greek mythology, and now I'm reading the Iliad (Lattimore translation) with a companion book. Next will be the Odyssey, then Hesiod's Theogony and Works and Days. From there I want to read the works of the Nine Lyrical Poets and the most important Greek plays. I also heard that Thucydides' History of the Pelopennesian War is pretty good. Can any user confirm?

I'm reading the first book at the moment in my language (translated in french), this is really good.

You read Iliad and Odyssey first, dingus, Plato references them all the time.

The chart includes those volumes as they’re good editions. Don’t try to read Plato’s complete works, it will take you years and you won’t understand a lot of it. Read the dialogues in pic related, then read Phaedrus, Symposium, and The Republic (in that order)

The prior and second analytics can be summarized by a scheme in the SEP related page, there is no need to actually read a bunch of poorly formulated greek sentences to understand classical logic.

As for physics and metaphysics, I'd cut most of the first and keep most books of the second. You can't spend your life reading Aristotle, it's too damn boring and honestly not worth the effort. 7 out of 10 times he's just reformulating platitudes in a very clear language. 3 out of 10 times he's the world changing genius we all know, but you must go straight for those.

The Ethics is a good text, well written and readable even for someone with no philosophical background, so leave it where it is.

>Iliad (Lattimore translation) with a companion book
I saw your post in the stacks thread

Here's what Lovecraft says about starting with the Greeks.

>In the classic Greek field, which forms the foundation of our whole structure of western culture, Homer must not be missed—and of all the various translations the prose version formed by Lang and Leaf’s Iliad and Butcher and Lang’s Odyssey is probably the closest in spirit to the original. The fascination of these eternal tales is such that their reading will be no duty. Other Greek masterpieces which ought to be read in good translations are the plays of great dramatists—such as Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound, Sophocles’ Oedipus the King and perhaps Antigone, Euripides’ Baccantes, Electra, Alcestis, and Medea, and some of Ariso-phanes’ satiric comedies like The Clouds, The Birds, and The Frogs. Plutarch’s Lives—or at least some of them—and a few of the Socratic dialogues of Plato (Apology, Crito, Phaedo, and some of the Republic—preferably in Jowett’s translation) are also good to round out one’s Hellenic reading. It might be well to have one’s reading of these books come at a time when one is studying about Greek life and customs in the course of one’s history reading. A good abridged course in Greek reading is formed by William Cleaver Wilkinson’s compendium called A Classic Greek Course in English.

This is the sort of thing we mean. A selective discriminatory dip.
You can read deeper if you truly love the stuff.

How necessary is this?

After, where do I start with Plato?

>After, where do I start with Plato?

Get one of the 'death of Socrates' collections.

>Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and the Phaedo

on my kindle I have the Grube translation of that book (3rd Ed.) that should be good right?

Can I jump into these without the epic poems?

is this book good or bad

>on my kindle I have the Grube translation of that book (3rd Ed.) that should be good right?

Yep. Grube is still highly regarded unlike many of his contemporaries and predecessor. His is an accessible style too which helps if you aren't use to Plato.

>Can I jump into these without the epic poems?

Yes. Though you should check out Homer one of these days.

If the Homeric corpus seems daunting to you, consider getting an
abbreviated version like Lombardo's Essential homer.

Another option is to get an audiobook version. The Fagles and Lombardo translations are both available in audiobook form, and Homer was meant to be heard as far as I'm concerned. Something to consider.

You should have a passing knowledge. I read the Odyssey but not the Iliad, and I was fine

Thanks for the help.

I know the basics of the stories, but I still need to read them. I will get round to them eventually, I just wondered if they were crucial.

Get the Landmark edition of Thucydides (and other texts from Greco-Roman era for that matter). They are great editions

>I also heard that Thucydides' History of the Pelopennesian War is pretty good. Can any user confirm?

Realpolitik is often traced back to Thucydides.
You may find this of interest.

This is actually how my high school did it too.

i would never get past the greeks if i had to read all that shit at my brainlet pace

Taken all-together, it may seem like a lot, but none of the pieces are very long I think.

pretty sure the socratic dialogues come to under 100 pages altogether.

Even if you manage to read a book per day the
Illiad will still take 24 days alone.

Thanks. I'll put it on my list then

Pseud retard spotted

Definitely get around to them eventually, but if kinda understand them you’ll be fine

based

>he didnt teach himself to read Greek using Homer

What great life advice did you learn from the Ethics?