So I've finally decided to unironically, genuinely, truthfully start with the Greeks

Veeky Forums still uses wojak memes from 2011.

This place is a time capsule. Get used to it.

Patricia Curd's Pre-Socratic Reader

Or Oxford's The First Philosophers

Read the Iliad, then read the Odyssey, then read Hesiod's Works and Days. Then you can read Plato, starting with the Apology of Socrates.

I know, sorry, I was just making a joke about Veeky Forums being retarded.

I'd start with reading Homer if you haven't already. Read a little about Greek history to get an idea of the timeline of events. Then go to the library and check out Graves' The Greek Myths and some Lyric poetry: Anacreon, Simonidies, Pindar and them. And read Philostratus' Heroicus. This is all just to get you into the mood. When you're done with that you can skip the Presocratics, really. Once you have a passing familiarity with Greek notions and character, begin with Plato. If you're totally new and want to throw yourself into it, Dover's Six Great Dialogues is the perfect place to start: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, The Republic. This will take some time and probably a few readings to digest, and you would be well served by a companion text or some youtube lectures or something. When you're ready, and if you're interesting in Plato's theology, attack the Timaeus.

When you're done with all that, you're basically ready to begin a serious analysis of the New Testament. This means both the blue team (Tertullian, Augustine) and the red team (Plotinus, Marcion, Proclus, etc).

Attached: qtgoodpost.jpg (1024x1024, 189K)

I

Attached: IMG_2051.jpg (3672x3024, 1.39M)

why can't you evolve

We do. It takes time to read.

It also might be because people don’t believe in God. That halts progress

Song of Achilles

Start with the sumerians

Commence with the Cretans

Approach with the Atlanteans

All but like two of these comments are useless. The truth is hardly anyone here reads to begin with, OP. This board is a waste of time if you want to discuss books other than the Bible or IJ.

Anyways,
>Illiad
>Odyssey
>Collected Poems of Sappho
>A copy of Essential Dialogues of Plato
>Reread Republic
>Complete Works of Aristotle
>The Life of Greece by Will Durant
From there you can read stoic or epicurean philosophy if that tickles your fancy. But, at least with the stoics, most of the really popular literature of that philosophy was written by the Romans. The chart an user posted here is also pretty good.

Don't forget Aeschylus. The Oresteia is a beautiful work of metaphorical poetry that is a satisfying follow-up to the Odyssey, and it's well worth OPs time.

>I'd watch till late at night, my eyes still burn
>I sobbed by the torch I lit for you alone.
>I never let it die...but in my dreams
>the high thin wail of a gnat would rouse me
>piercing like a trumpet - I could see you
>suffer more than all
>the hours that slept with me could ever bear.

Heraclitus
Parmenides
Pythagoras
Homer
Aeschylus
Euripides
Sophocles
Plato/Soc
Aristotle
Pindar
Thucydides
Aristophanes

I also highly recommend Plutarch (Greekaboo), Herodotus, Hesiod and reading the Orphic hymns, any good book on Greek mythology, the Homeric hymns out loud,

Move with the Mycenaeans

Is there a better source for the Greek myths? I don't want a "retelling"

It depends on how deep you want to get on it user. I've been doing serious background research and improving wiki as a result, as way to improve my own understanding.

The safest general starting point is Iliad/Odyssey for culture. Then learn a bit about the presocratics (there's multiple readers and sources, but this part gets VERY hard if you get bogged down in tall weeds as I am), and then go on to the Platonic dialogues that you already know in some sense are the next step. Then some Aristotle, later.

*These are merely my personal interests. More artistically and/or mathematically inclined people should do the various plays and Euclid at appropriate points. I had the pleasure of looking up a citation in Aristotle in relation to some goofy ratio argument in Euclid a few months back. The point being that I better understand how these various texts and authors inter-relate.

Read Plato's Republic, Aristotle's Politics, Thucydides History of the Peloponnesian War. Also read Plato's shorter dialogues like Gorgias, Euthyphro etc.

Then read Leo Strauss's 'City and Man'. It's three essays on these three texts. Then read Leo Strauss' 'Natural Right and History'

Then read Alexandre Kojeve's 'Introduction to the Reading of Hegel'

Then Read Nietzsche's 'Beyond Good and Evil' and 'Genealogy of Morals'.

Then read Deleuze's "Nietzsche and Philosophy" and Lawrence Lampert's 'Leo Strauss and Nietzsche'

Then Read Michael Allen Gillespie's 'Hegel, Heidegger, and the ground of History'

Then read Richard Velkley's 'Heidegger, Strauss and the premises of philosophy'

Then attempt to read Heidegger 'Being and Time'

That should give you and absolute grounding in western thought in the shortest time possible.

quality post user. What do you mean by red and blue teams though?

>Leo Strauss
>kojeve
>Nietzsche
>Deleuze
>lambert
>gillespies
>velkley
>Heidegger
Literally the only two people on this list worth reading are Nietzsche and Heidegger, Western canon my add

Homer, Hesiod, Tragedians

Good post.

You should add some Krauss and Bourriaud.

What do you mean by having plotinus and Augustine on different "teams"? Wasn't Augustine also a neo-platonist? I recall him referencing plotinus often.

Divide your free time into three portions. Give the principal to History, the other two, which should be shorter, to Philosophy and Poetry.
>First read Goldsmith's history of Greece. This will give you a digested view of that field. Then take up antient history in the detail, reading the following books, in the following order: Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophontis Hellenica, Xenophontis Anabasis, Arrian, Quintus Curtius, Diodorus Siculus, Justin. This shall form the first stage of your historical reading, and is all I need mention to you now. In Greek poetry read Homer, Anacreon, Aeschylus, Euripides, Sophocles. In morality, read Epictetus, Xenophontis Memorabilia and Plato's Socratic dialogues.

>Starts post with "Literally"
>Is a brainlet
Every single time

>phaedrus before sympossium

nigga

Right here: gutenberg.org/files/1656/1656-h/1656-h.htm

Attached: Socrates-businessinsider-620x480.jpg (620x450, 47K)

lmao

>What do you mean by red and blue teams though?
I mean there was a set of scholars back in the day who used the apostolic texts to organize a very specific set of beliefs in order to found a new Church that preferred its followers held correct beliefs and followed correct practice over and indeed instead of philosophical ability. And their opposite number was another group of scholars who were Platonists, who opposed the formation of one 'correct' doctrine because it was a new religion and not philosophy. The Church was a synthesis of the Old and New Testaments. Platonists and their ideas had abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with Semitic messianic prophecies or

There is some overlap in these groups, which is how the Socrates-Jesus comparison gets made. Socrates had been a new form of hero over the Homeric heroes of old. He was a hero of philosophy, the virtue he made praiseworthy was cognitive ability rather than martial skill. Similarly, Jesus was also a new kind of hero. The messiah expected in the OT by the so-called new Christians, he also inverted the world. Through his teaching the weak would become strong, the poor would be rich and the pacifist would reign. And his philosophy of peace and love was true to its word: we are not sub-Saharan Africa. We have thousands of years of relatively peaceful technological development in the can because of his teachings.

Augustine had been a platonist, when the school was on its last legs. He'd also been a gnostic, and an atheist iirc. He changed his mind when he got older as usually happens with men and he borrowed heavily from Plotinus to write his City of God. Only instead of revering the Platonic notion of the One, he did a Find+Replace with Christ and Heavenly Father. Basically he gutted the philosophy to make a worshipful paean.

Attached: qtrhodie.jpg (666x1033, 327K)

>Platonists and their ideas had abso-fucking-lutely nothing to do with Semitic messianic prophecies or
Woops, forgot to finish my sentence. They had nothing to do with Semitic heritage and rejected the assimilation of their reasonable ideas into what amounted to a new cult. By Augustine's time, however, Christianity had been the official religion of Rome for a couple of centuries. The wind was blowing in a new direction and the Platonist's days were numbered.

Attached: qtmiku.jpg (850x1200, 168K)

How to Read a Book

>Sophoklēs over Aiskhulos
>Theban plays
Sure is modernist in here, only one that's really relevant to understanding Greek culture is Oidipous at Kolonoi.

Gnosticism and Hermeticism are decidedly semitic you fucking LARP fag and the Church had nothing legitimate to do with Platonism at any point. Christ doesn’t use the dialectic in the Corpus or in the Dialogues at all. He doesn’t deduce from first principles, he doesn’t argue coherently.
>using pedo anime
fuck off

Ok so once we read the recommended books on the Greek list what are we supposed to do with the information we learn? I want to learn how to read/write well but I'm not sure how to start. Over the past year I have gained an interest in Western mytholgy, Hinduism, and various occult topics but I don't know anyone irl to discuss these topics with.

>Gnosticism and Hermeticism are decidedly semitic
Not true, semitic belief systems are all decidedly materialist.

>using pedo anime
uh she clearly has breasts, retard. I'm going to ignore most of your post until you learn to read and come back with something more substantive. Except for this piece right here:

>He doesn't deduce from first principles
Precisely. The Church functions under the assumption that God exists, and its qualities are those which are highest good: truth, beauty, justice. It is a deification of the first principle. It was the obvious next step in the evolution of Platonic thought.

Attached: qtceles.jpg (1500x1483, 957K)

Start with a good overview. Something like Guthries' The Greek Philosophers: From Thales to Aristotle and something like Dover's Ancient Greek Literature.

B U M P

did you start yet

Attached: qt2d.png (1251x1026, 1.25M)

this, but ironically

Wow who would’ve thought, a useful post on Veeky Forums for once.

Thanks user.

I'm not the guy youre responding to but
>It is a deification of the first principle. It was the obvious next step in the evolution of Platonic thought.
Previously you said that Platonists had nothing to do with semetic prophecies... but that point above makes it seem like the reversal would be true. So which one is it? You are not mentioning if the old or new testament was influenced by Platonism or not and confusing my smoothbrain with vagueness.

The Old Testament is just that. Old, from about the time of the Iron Age or Homer. It contains the tribal chronicle of the Israelites and their creation myth, a prophecy of a messiah, and a book of laws. There is no Christ in it, and in fact the Jews (specifically the Sanhedrin) viewed Jesus as a false messiah. There is also no Platonism in it as far as I know -- though some of Isaiah could be interpreted as being a reference to an unknowable God -- because it is the Jewish book.

The New Testament is much, much newer. It was assembled around the 1st-2nd centuries from apostolic texts by Hellenic Jews, who no doubt would have held the works of Plato and Aristotle as sacred. Remember Paul, one of the foremost of the apostles? He was a Jew, and a Greek philosopher, who converted to Christianity. His conversion story is in the book of Acts. Before his conversion he was merely Saul of Tarsus, who according to the legend was on his way to persecute the Christians before encountering Jesus himself on the road to Damascus. This short narrative in itself is a flash retelling of the Christian signature role reversal, where the meek inherit power and those whom power has corrupted (the wicked) repent.

It's important to note that the New Testament was written with an eye on the Old. It was specifically designed to sit on top of the OT and draw authority for the new religion from it. This is why Christ is in the messiah role. To a Jew, the NT is literally viewed like the Book of Mormon would be to a Catholic.

You're welcome user.

Attached: qtblastin.jpg (540x1488, 148K)

bump

Attached: randompages.jpg (4000x2250, 989K)

hesiod theogony

this is mandatory, you must start with this, no other way

Brief History of Ancient Greece
Mythology
Homer – Iliad, Odyssey
Hesiod - Theogony / Work and Days
Aeschylus – Tragedies
Sophocles – Tragedies
Herodotus – Histories
Euripides – Tragedies
Thucydides – History of the Peloponnesian War
Hippocrates – Medical Writings
Aristophanes – Comedies
Plato – Dialogues
Aristotle – Works

dude, hamilton is really good. just read it. If you want to die of boredom read apollodorus' library. It's basically the same thing but extremely boring.

the Greeks