Philosophy

Do I have to read the greeks to understand the writings of Nietszhe, Evola, Hegel, Marx, Rand, Mussolini, Schopenhauer etc... More modern philosophers?

No

Start with Descartes

>Evola

Schopenhauer incorporates elements of platonism into his philosophy, but it's pretty basic.
Nietszche was all about the Greeks.

Why?

No. The Greeks are fucking useless.

Because le /pol/ boogeyman.

Not really, and besides all the philosophers you mentioned beside Hegel and Schopenhauer are gay. You're better off reading phenomenology and analytic philosophy.

Why? Also give some recs

>Nietszche was all about the Greeks.

Why?

coz he thought the pre-socratics supported his position most of any philosopher.

Why? Mainly because they're pretty niche and not really relevant to contemporary philosophical discourse.

As for recs, um Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, Wittgenstein, John Searle, Thomas Kuhn, and Richard Rorty are all pretty good.

Tbh though it sounds like you interests are moreso in political philosophy? If thats tthe case than people like Nietzsche, Evola, Marx, and Rand are certainly worthwhile and will give you a better understanding of the development and basis of the various contemporary political denominations. It just that their work doesn't have as much breadth and isn't really important if you want to read and engage contemporary philosophy. To be honest though the most important figure in mainstream political philosophy (which is perhaps less deep and interesting than people like Evola and Nietzsche) are H.L.A. Hart and John Rawls.

I'm very sorry that you have shit taste user

No

most of the modern philosophers misinterpret the greeks anyway

I don't agree with Evola on some things, but to say he didn't have depth means you didn't even bother to read him.

Why would you add Evola, Rand, and Mussolini to that list

They aren't philosophers

breadth rather

>a philosopher isn't a philosopher
>a person who wrote plenty on political-philosophy isn't a philosopher
>a person who studied philosophy and created his own political ideology isn't a philosopher

Just because Ayn Rand's ideas are shit and Mussolini didn't write much himself, doesn't mean they aren't philosophers.

>a philosopher isn't a philosopher

>Rand

Author, not a philosopher.

>Evola
maybe but I'm hesitant to say people who believed in lost continents past the 19th century have very reliable information.

>Mussolini

Not a philosopher at all in any way shape or form.

this guy is right

It seems you didn't read what I said. Admittedly my post was littered with typos, but I think it's still clear that writers like Evola and Nietzsche have more "depth" (or breadth, rather) than more rigorous mainstream political philosophers like Hart and Rawl. That being said, while I'm not really into political philosophy, I prefer shit like Rawls, Hart, and Derek Parfitt to more alternative and radical political and moral philosophy a la Marx, Nietzsche, Evola, Rand, etc. Personally though, I prefer philosophy of language and mind, linguistics, and cognitive science (hence the recommendations I listed).

I just wanted to know why you thought they were gay and all you had to type that it was because of you don't like the genre.

Yes if you don't want to be a pseud

Fuck off empiricist

Well yes, that's true, but that wasn't really what I was getting at with the last post. I was moreso trying to say that I wasn't making the argument that Evola isn't deep. Quite the contrary.

Don't read western philosophy.

All those guys studied the Greeks though so it would help to know where they are coming from.

I suggest you pick a book you like, read it, and then read some of the older books that it references, so you can keep reading stuff you like