1808 pages

Good lord! Be sure it doesn't land on your foot!

Just a brief intro before each dialogue.

Not even 2000 pages? I thought something bigger was coming at me

I spent two years reading the whole thing. No regrets

>some random user on Veeky Forums BTFOed him last month.

wtf I hate Playdough now

I read the whole thing cover-to-cover over 3 months. Laws sucked. Parmenides made me want to kill myself.

The entire concept of 'blowing X philosopher the fuck out' misses the point of philosophy and you ought to be ashamed if you aren't consciously b8ing.

Plato is for abstract thinkers, his philosophy works in the socratic way of deconstructing every possible concept and giving logical metaphors to attack philosophical questions, one of the best things about his philosophy is that it's more of great literature with interesting dialogue, situations and characters, Socrates is an example of a true living philosopher who spent his his life living well and being respected by many and even though the points Plato makes are many and he goes very deep striping the concept to its core and investigate its place in the objective/subjective reality, eventually he leaves it up to you as a reader to think for yourself and try to come up with a satisfactory answer as he doesn't shove a sanitized materialistic stance like most modern philosophy, he is disinfected by modernity and because of that we as readers
get a picture of philosophical concepts being inquired as they are more closely themselves in the human experience and not as they are thought of in the modern "understanding" of human reality.

Which Plato should I start with? Republic?

No way, Apology.

That's rather short. And after that?

>The entire concept of 'blowing X philosopher the fuck out' misses the point of philosophy
Except it doesn't. There is nothing philosophers love more than blowing the fuck out of other philosophers.

Read the initial dialogues, Euthyphro, Crito and Phaedo.

that's called arguing, they don't BTFO EACH OTHER XD, they argue about their views on philosophical concepts

>spend a year doing nothing but reading Plato's complete works
>isolate myself from all other information while absorbing Plato
>end of the year leave my house and try to have conversations
>I'm wrong about essentially everything and all of my ideas and sentiments have been outdated for hundreds of years
>everyone laughs at my retarded political and metaphysical ideas
>have to relearn the entire history of philosophy again
Thanks Plato

Same fucking thing.

>implying philosophers don't form rivalries
>implying philosophers don't resort to insults
>implying philosophers don't take pleasure in being right or skillfully taking down an opponent in a public argument
How much philosophy have you read exactly?

You sound very boring.

He's right. On republic i missed some shifts from adimantus or glauco to socrates. With trasymachus not, tho.

That's the Aristotle diss, ain't it? I've meaning to read it, as a biased peripatetic.

Spent like 15 months on it, off and on (mostly off), and am down to the last 150 pages. Surprised others have read it cover to cover; I don't hear from you guys in the occasional Plato threads, which tend to be filled with people rushing past Republic to reach modern philosophy.

I'm on Laws right now (50 pages left). Hasn't been awesome, but I've enjoyed the "proof" (albeit not a good one) that the gods exist and take concern for human affairs, and that the soul is the oldest and most powerful thing in existence.

But all that legislation on "who can pick what kind of fruit" can fuck off. Really, dessert grapes get their own law?

PS impressive reading speed. Did you annotate?