What philosophers have you read, Veeky Forums?
What philosophers have you read, Veeky Forums?
Other urls found in this thread:
docs.google.com
twitter.com
...
wheres Maximum Stirner?
>not having Thoreau checked off
That's the first thing you read. Walden is essential litcore
Also,
>Pythagoras
>no Archimedes, Eudoxus, Eutocius, Apollonius, or Euclid!
No Euclid? Seriously?
You are like little babby
Watch this
>NOT HAVING THOREAU CHECKED OFF
Thor-who?
Deleuze.
Most of Pythagoras' work is lost, so if you check off Pythagoras you're basically saying you've read Elements, where a lot of his teachings find home with Eudoxus.
Apollonius did the same thing with other mathematicians, just parroted their findings in his work. The first couple books of On Conics aren't even Apollonius at all, they are other people.
I just know this shit because I read the fucking texts. Primary Greek mathematical texts man. Dry stuff, very challenging and dense. But rewarding.
>not having Nietzsche checked
That's babbytier Veeky Forums, what the hell OP?
>Freud
>philosopher
Where's Sam Harris?
Occult writers aren't Philosophers mate
I've read the birth of tragedy and other bits and pieces, but i'm studying philosophy chronologically for the most part. Currently studying Christianity and theology, and I want to read Kant and Schop before I dive into Nietzsche
Try actually reading him first.
Sorry haven't finished my background reading on Aleister Crowley yet
Which two of that list would make the best comedy duo?
Jesus & Nietzsche
Diogenes and Schopenhauer
Machiavelli and Singer
I'm gonna take a risk here and say Hobbes and Foucault
>Jesus was a philosopher
>Jesus existing
Nice joke, OP
At least you admit that you haven't read him, which was my point. Case closed.
nigga turned water to wine, if that isn't advanced natural philosophy then get outta my face
There are loads on this list that didn't exist desu
sorry lit im still starting with the greeks
>hasn't even read aristotle
Where is Jeremy Bentham?
Where is Lacan?
If real, then very good
Read some Hedi
I will, I'm actually in the middle of Kant in detail and intend to go through Husserl first
Outline = read excerpts or secondhand
Check = Read
Double Check = Read and worked with significantly
Also this needs the Chinese lol
Good on you, Kant and Husserl are really ideal for proceeding forward.
>not Calvin and Hobbes
Or Luther and Hobbes maybe..
he's not important and no academic takes his ideas seriously
True in my experience
Hume and Russell
Frege and Husserl
Leibniz and Spinoza
Or, ofc.
Socrates and Hemlock
>the rapid expanse of Christianity
>extra-biblical sources
>not pointing to a historical Jesus
embarrassing tbqhwy
>heraclitus but no parmenides
>zeno with the romans
>darwin hayek and freud
really makes you think
Voltaire?
Camus?
Neither Calvin nor Luther are on the chart. Anyway, I think Hobbes' stodgy rationalism would contrast well with Foucault's radical opposition to any form of systemization. At the same time, they share a common disdain for and pessimism towards mankind as a whole.
Emerson, Fichte, Bachelard...
What quantity of material would you feel you needed to read to feel like you have legitimately "read" anyone on this list?
How many times would you need to re-read that body of work?
Does Veeky Forums even reread things?
Only Derrida
To me that shows how correct he was. Academics are content to parrot Marx's criticism despite the fact it is literalist, vapid, and vaults to the heights of autism.
Add Gramsci.
It requires Anaxagoras
Also: it requires Zygmunt Bauman
Darwin is not a philosopher. Stop being Euphoric.
I thought there wasn't anything written by the pre-socratic philosophers?
How so? I fucking hate maths, is there any other reason I should read it?
Stop forcing your marxist bullshit, pizza nigger.
Pleb
only stirner
Someone please update and correct that stupid list already.
none. i have vague ideas on most and i come here to practice how to strategically crush people who have more knowledge than me. although in reality i'm guessing most are probably doing the same.
Where is Chomsky?
...
what do you mean by ticking diogenes, socrates etc? how have you 'read' them? dialogues etc?
Whete is Sam Harris?
Lenin and Plato
why are there no philosophers of color?
Plato, Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius, Nietzsche.
Jesus is there
>Marcus Aurelius
Who? I don't see him on the graph
Avicenna
jesus was white
I really hate this chart.
>Thales, Heraclitus, Pythagoras, Diogens, Democritus, Zeno. What is? The party of fragments?
>Jesus? I'm going to buy a fedora!
>Avicenna, Why not Averroè?
>Petrarch? Why not Dante?
>Hobbes? Where is Calvin (and Luther)? And isn't Bacon a little girl?
>D'alambert and Diderot JesuisMontesquieu(andVoltaire)
>I wanna fug Simone
>WHERE IS CROCE?
>WHERE IS BENEDETTO CROCE?
I started reading philosophy almost 2 years ago and only read Hegel, Plato and the pre-socratics in this time.
>socrates
>read
do you even lift bruh?
He definitely existed, the question is was he holy?
Logic.
>
>marx vs bakunin
>not marx vs stirner
come on, marx literally wrote a 200 page ad hominem on stirner
bullshit
>not reading Cicero
Literally a pleb
Thats not particularly hard for someone who is a Phil major
He definitely was holy, the question is was he the son of God?
Yeah you're right if they haven't read the complete works of the author in question
Where's Voltaire? Did I miss him?
...
I've read all Socrates and had many a torrential orgasm, but I really don't give a shit about Plato.
>Image not titled "fsjalsophers"
>Derrida without heidegger
wat
No Peterson?
...
pure bullshit
also Ghazali, Khoja Akhmet Yassawi, Rumi, Omar Khayyam, Sheyh Galib (he's more like a fantasy writer tho)... mostly eastern
>no black woman philosopher
DROPPED
rather than make my own thread
Could someone post the google doc about how to into philosophy?
Why did you check off people like Thales, Socrates or Jesus when there's nothing written by them? Are you one of those shitters who think reading an article on Wikipedia about them is the same as reading them ?
This chart doesn't have a philosopher I know of. WTF OP? This is why philosophy is dying.
phil grad student reporting in
>red Xs indicate philosophers who didn't write anything
Regarding Thales, I assumed he had fragments in the Fragments of the Presocratics. I just checked and the only extant fragment is called "a late forgery." My bad.
Are you enjoying it?
Yeah, for the most part. It's really hard, though. Not a fan of standard contemporary analytic style philosophy, but there's enough variety to get around that. I don't really want to do anything else, so it'd take a lot to make me regret going to grad school for philosophy. Maybe if it was a worse school or if I had to pay for it. It's very nice to be paid to study philosophy, despite the onerous workload.
How did you manage to be paid?
Most good PhD programs will give you a stipend, presumably so you don't need to work on the side. They'll make you TA or teach eventually, though. Mine lets you just take classes for the first two years, though (I'm just wrapping up the second year).
>claiming to have read Socrates or Diogenes
HUGE meme