Should I start reading philosophy? I'm afraid I'll be learning non-trivial results hidden in obtuse language...

I just randomly decided one day, for no good reason, to get into philosophy, so to get a decent overview I read Bertrand Russell A History Of Western Philosophy.
Looking back, I think I got lucky, because I picked it almost at random in a second-hand bookshop and it's not all that bad.

But in general I try to avoid anything that isn't a primary source, coz life is short.

Heraclitus fragments. See 27.

Attached: heraclitus-fragments-3.png (563x492, 203K)

Do you think you have learned and benefited from your philosophy studies? And would recommend it to others?

Read it or think about the ideas if you want to reinvent some wheels.
If you're doing it chronologically, there are better starts, like the presocratics or Greek myths (or even earlier).
Philosophy is a conversation, but you can get some info on the conversation at any point, I recommend reading the parts of the conversation you're interested in, what you're willing to read.

I've seen the following texts described as accessible for newcomers to philosophy:

The Nicomachean Ethics
Plato - Five Dialogues
Plato - The Symposium

Can someone confirm this?

Attached: porn stars in 2018.jpg (1024x1024, 173K)

Heraclitus is my nigga

If I want to start with the presocratics, wat do?

Just read "The First Philosophers"

nothing important happens no the whites didn’t know how to think till the meds gave them the gnosis. kierkegaard is a fucking retarded pseud christfag. no christians at all except cor liebniz. none. if you give a damn about being a philosopher you have to set aside nonsense like religion in its entirety user, its fucking bullshit used by priests to steal resources. do not fall into it, you can be a theist but do not worship the christian god, do not pay any mind to people who fawn over the christian god, they inevitably shoot themselves in the foot as philosophers and appeal to faith. faith is anathema, it has no place in philosophy.

Thanks. I want to do it chronologically the ol'fashioned way so I don't miss anything.
hmm but even if they are retarded you might still have to read them to understand how later non-religious philosophers refuted them or were influenced by them?

Your average atheist everyone.

>Heraclitus
>muh fire

im fucking tired of entertaining you people, go suck off a pedo priest
no you can just read stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, don’t ever read christians. its a meme that christfags spread in phil circles and in unis to try to ensnare idealists into being christfags. absolutely under no circumstances should you entertain exoteric religion. if you do, put down the phil books and go join their faith, practice it as just a pleb because that’s what you are. a religious philosopher is a jumped up priest who isn’t attending to his flock. aquinas and augustine are fucking idiots.

> you might still have to read them to understand how later non-religious philosophers refuted them or were influenced by them?
Yes. That's the way to do it. Know your enemy. You can even learn from them.

I wouldn't say Aristotle Ethics is "accessible" new readers but it definitely is the best start for Aristotle. Read Euthyphro/Apology/Crito/Phadeo as an intro.

Learned - yes
Benefitted - to an extent

Reading some philosophy doesn't hurt but I don't think it's worth spending huge amounts of time on.

world turned to shit the moment people began treating philosophy seriously.
books were collected like expensive cars, philosophy was just one of the more exotic variants. monks were the bitcoinminers of middle ages, gutenberg popped that bubble and commoners could larp as nobles with a real library, eventually forgetting the original purpose of books as value storage and reading them unironically.

How do I stop myself from wasting my time?

Attached: 0361394.png (811x767, 413K)

>unironically
What? Did the bitcoinminers of middle ages read books as expensive as cars ironically?

Read chronologically. It's important to understand how philosophical thought developed over time.

Plato>Aristotle>Augustine>Aquinas>Descartes>Hume>Kant>Hegel

Finish this progression and you'll have an undergraduate understanding of philosophy.

This. I have so much to read, but waste so much time on trivialities.

>Read Euthyphro/Apology/Crito/Phadeo as an intro.
Yeah these are the five dialogues i mentioned. Thanks for the answer.

If you want taste you'll do this
Plato>Aristotle>Epictetus>Plotinus>Augustine>Aquinas>Descartes>>Spinoza>Hume>Kant>Hegel>Kierkegaard>Nietzsche>Heidegger

Time spent reading is never wasted, friend,

Even if you don't think you've learnt anything, or can't remember what you've read it will still be in your subconscious, and will still make you smarter and more knowledgeable over time.

“I cannot remember the books I've read any more than the meals I have eaten; even so, they have made me.”― Ralph Waldo Emerson

Also; reading from a practical sense is not wasting time, its a productive activity. What else would you be doing, playing video games? The only thing more important is working, be that assignments or employment.

Are you by any chance Slavoj Žižek?

Attached: 400.jpg (4783x1458, 740K)

true, although reading some stuff can be much less productive than reading other stuff

Philosophy is a waste of time.

It's all opinions, and you have no reason to accept their opinion on anything because it is, after all, just an opinion.

You don't need to justify your beliefs to anyone.

Attached: 1504296475288.png (646x595, 280K)

I think I just vomited in my mouth

for plato, yes, the best dialogues to begin with are those surrounding the imprisonment, apology and death of socrates. Symposium is great and accessible too. Plato overall is very accessible if you read him in a good order (aka not starting with the republic), as opposed to aristotle. All his works are much longer than most of plato's dialogues (few exceptions like republic and laws) and much denser, so although nichomachean ethics might be more accessible than his other works, it still isn't that much of a friendly read and one should be familiar with plato before attempting it.

this. The simple fact you are honestly looking for knowledge is in itself good

what is your life like that you can be unsure of that

>the axioms of science are opinions

i don't agree with science, faith is better, now what bitch

As far as I can tell, you’re afraid you’ll realise the Scholastics were right if your read them?

Sure, just don't get bogged down in metaphysics unless you find it truly interesting.

Not to be impatient, but if I have to read like 6 works just from Plato, at that rate how am I ever going to get to the 20th century?

you’re a stupid fucking christfaggot and i hope your Semitic demon God eats you when you die

The correct argument to make here is that Homer wrote works of fiction aka tragedies, which Plato thought were not as good for the soul as contemplation of pure reason i.e. geometry and philosophy.

>science
>philosophy
"oh no but it's technically a descendent"
oh no but that's not what you study in a university philosophy course.

What tragedies did Homer write?

Don't go into it with this much apprehension. Start with Plato's Apology cycle and then just continue from there. Cruise through wikipedia and read quick snippets of what different Philosophers thought. You don't necessarily need to understand all of the western philosophical canon in order to tackle later works, though you may have to google a concept or two (thing in itself, a priori, "never predicable of a subject" etc.). That being said, just dive into philosophy headfirst and see if you like it. Best wishes, my friend

>Skip through Hegel to read Nietzsche
Don't you need to be above 18 to go here?

Possibly the best way to start with philosophy is Peter Adamson's podcast, The History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps. He presents a continuous narrative of western philosophy, covering many topics which are skipped in conventional histories, such as the influence of Hippocratic medicine and medieval Islamic thought (his specialty). Every few episodes he does an interview with some academic on particular topics. The first 51 episodes, ranging from Thales to just after Aristotle, are a great overview of Greek thought and I'd heavily recommend them.

Sophie's World by Gaarder is a novel, told from the perspective of an adolescent girl receiving lectures about western philosophy up to Sartre. It can profitably be read by adults as well as clueless teenagers, and has a clear continental influence.

Then you have multi-volume, academic histories of philosophy, which can be good reference books as well as continuous reads.
Copleston (9 volumes) and Anthony Kenny (4 volumes & one-volume Brief History which is good) are usually recommended. Copleston intended his work for catholic students, as a result giving you a detailed view of medieval philosophy and Thomism, but is appreciated much wider than that.
Routledge History of Philosophy contains essays from many academics, coalescing into a decent narrative, and gives you a taste of the up-to date research which goes into these thinkers. Not all academics are equally great, but these volumes are still worthwhile reads and references.

That should be quite enough of a list for secondary literature. For primary texts, try to read editions by respected universities such as Oxford and Cambridge, which usually contain helpful notes and interpretative essays. Some good starting points, in my opinion, would be:
● The First Philosophers: Presocratics and Sophists (Robin Waterfield)
● Five Dialogues of Plato (G.M.A Grube, John M.Cooper)
● Complete Works of Plato (edited by John M.Cooper)
● Descartes - Discourse on Method (Oxford, translated by Ian Maclean)
● Descartes - Meditations, Objections and Replies (Hackett)
● Basic Works of Aristotle (edited by Richard McKeon)

Also, the guy telling you to skip the entire medieval period is a huge idiot, and you should not listen to him. Many important figures wrote in this period, especially after the recovery of Aristotle's texts. You'll want to check out Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas and Scotus at least. Understanding scholasticism will give you a good background on what the early modern were reacting against all the way to Kant.
However, it's a huge period so secondary literature is a must to give you a taste beyond the major figures. If you can, find works by Etienne Gilson. John Marenbon has several contemporary overviews on medieval philosophy.

No, I recommend you read Visual Novels.

Attached: blonde glasses nosefu.jpg (960x1280, 184K)