As a HS I read Socrates' Apology and the Symposium

>As a HS I read Socrates' Apology and the Symposium.
>Years later, I decide I need some philosophy in my life so I go out and buy The Republic.
>Realize I don't understand shit about it.
>Buy the Illiad and the Oddyssey.
>Ok this is pretty cool but I'm not sure I get it, I finish them anyways.
>Then read the Republic and 8 more of Plato's books thinking I "get them"
>Read history book.
>Realize there was tons of stuff I didn't get while reading the Illiad that would have made it a much better experience.
>Start reading Hesiod.
>This makes me realize I didn't even get the history book I read, Homer's works or Plato's works for that matter.
>Start reading book about the presocratics philosophers.
>Even deeper realization about how much shit I missed on Plato's books, but also notice that reading Plato was essential to understanding the earlier thinkers.

Is philosophy nothing but an endless loop of realizing how clueless you were a week ago?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protagoras
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Yes

Who are you quoting?

My thoughts.

no, if you keep trying you will enter the spiral. At first it seems impenetrable but after a few false starts and wider readings things start to clear up. This is of course if and only if you truly embrace the whole scope of western philosophy and thought. Hint: start in the middle somewhere. The presocratics are extremely difficult to read

>The presocratics are extremely difficult to read

t. pleb

so how do i stop from fucking up like you OP?

Your problem was buying a book that's in the public domain.

>inb4 his problem was buying a book

After going through this loop of shit I'm almost sure it's unavoidable. Intertextuality will always be there to fuck you up one way or the other.

t. pseud

If you are young or full of fire, devour knowledge like it's a buffet of the gods about to close forever, not like a epicurean tasting menu where you pic and choose and roll morsels around in your mouth.

Eventually you will start clearing texts by era and continent, and intertextuality becomes an asset rather than a liability.

>waaah I didn't understand something therefore nobody did

project harder retard

>ITT: anons think you are only supposed to read books once

>waaah I'm self conscious about my intellect and would never admit to finding something difficult because it would shatter my fragile ego

Holy...

That was never implied anywhere in this thread.

>still projecting

Not everyone has trouble with exactly the same stuff you have trouble with. The pre-socratics are not hard.

What is notable, then, about works revealing more depending on what you have to work with, or needing to reread books to take advantage of new knowledge?

>claims difficulty is relative
>makes absolute claim about the difficulty of specific authors

Is this the wisdom of the presocratics, Veeky Forums?

You beat me to it. Made me laugh, though.

Considering that the pre-socratics being easy is my reality, making it absurd for me to suggest otherwise, yes, that is exactly the wisdom of the pre socratics.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protagoras

Maybe you would have caught that if you hadn't had so much trouble with them. Better luck next time user :^)

Nah, I think they're easy too. I was just going to point out the internal contradiction of your position when beat me to it.

It's fine. At one point you'll realize that there is no objective truth to be found in philosophy and you'll either become an edgy nihilist, a laid-back nihilist, or a stoic.

You read philosophy hoping to find objective truth?

Sheesh.

Such is the life of a pseud, I guess.

It wasn't absolute you absolute faggot

> Realize there was tons of stuff I didn't get while reading the Illiad that would have made it a much better experience.

Like what?

t. 50 pages away from finishing it.

Yes, basically.

Did you not get Socrates? "All I know is that I know nothing"

depend on translation user. when you find the perfect translation, you will understand

Give an example of things you failed to 'get'. I never had this experience.

No, but you have to combine primary sources with secondary literature

fpbp

which book on the Trojan War should I read before I get to the Iliad and Odyssey?

Start with the greeks, man.

I'm trying, my dude.

>Plato was essential to understanding the earlier thinkers
Wrong

Kek, you roasted him