Starting with Plato

Greeting Veeky Forums I realize this is a slow board so I'll be patient, but as a avid Veeky Forums browser, I have bare bones understanding of philosophy (I'm more informed than normies on it.) and I know my philosophers pretty well from studying history. I've started with the Greeks from a historical and literary standpoint but not philosophical.

I have a decent knowledge of the Socratic method, Socratic and Platonic dialogues, and I think it's better time spent If i skip the pre-socratics and go straight to Plato. Is this recommended? And if it is can anyone give me a quick Plato rundown and what I should expect?

You can do it. The presocratics are interesting but barely anything from them survives, so you can really only get the gist of their ideas. There are some books that give you context and all of their writings and it totals to only about 270 pages.

Yes.

Perhaps you'd like to start with Heraclitus and Parmenides. Their works are short.

>I have a decent knowledge of the Socratic method, Socratic and Platonic dialogues, and I think it's better time spent If i skip the pre-socratics and go straight to Plato.
>better time spent
Cut the video games and watching tele not the presocratics.

No you absolutely need to cover:
Parmenides, Heraclitus, Anaxagoras, Pythagoras and the Sophists. (And my personal favorite Zeno)

In other words pick up the Oxford or the Penguin on the PreSocratics, its a fun quick read and will pay off a thousand fold when reading Plato.

The Iliad, Odyssey, Theogony & Works and Days are also mandatory prerequisites.

Everything here is referenced by Plato and is required to even remotely understand his works.

Bump

If you can't understand Plato without reading Theogony, you're a literal brainlet. Everything necessary to understanding the dialogues is in the dialogues (the references are explained through conversational context).

I'm not saying Theogony isn't worth reading, though.

Of course.

But now try understanding the issues of the Parmenides without actually reading/knowing Parmenides.

>I think it's better time spent If i skip the pre-socratics
NOOOOOOO

Just start with the Republic. Unless you want to understand every single reference to Greek mythology or culture.

>Assuming OP has required Mythological knowledge
>Not just considering Theogony & Works and Day as a singular work
>Telling OP to skip an 800 line read
nice

> Everything necessary to understanding the dialogues is in the dialogues (the references are explained through conversational context)
just wrong

Fuck right off, cunt. He should start with the Trial of Socrates, they are the groundwork of Platonic philosophy and are simpler for a newcomer.

The Republic isn't hard to read for newcomers either unless you have ADHD

OP here.

I have all of the required mythological information considering I'm a practitioner of Greco-Roman paganism, and I've read the Iliad multiple times along with Theogony and the Aeneid. From here, you can assume I have cultural and religious information down and understood well.

But you will be lost if you're unaware of Socrates method. Read at least Euthyphro and Apology.

It's not hard to read, but it's incredibly hard to understand properly.
This is pretty much the basic problem with Plato: he looks simple but is really hard to understand while guys like Kant look really complicated but are easily understandable.

mine 9401196
not mine, but correct >considering I'm a practitioner of Greco-Roman paganism
questionable
Also you didn't mention the Odyssey which is worrying.

Just didn't pop up in my head right away lel. If you're asking if I read it, the answer is yes.

I would read a few detailed overview of philosophy books before I get into actually reading any primary material, but once you do that then you can completely skip reading the pre-Socratics, they are unnecessary. If you want some detail on them, however, I recommend the History of Philosophy without any gaps podcast to fill you in.

I disagree, you may need to have some idea of the pre-socratics, and you definitely need to know general Greek mythology/culture/history, but you do not need to specifically read any of the things listed. The Illiad/Odyssey will improve the experience, but everything else is better covered in a secondary source.

I agree, the trial dialogues are necessary reading and should probably come prior to the Republic.

Bumpity.

>he thinks Plato doesn't lie
oh anonkun :3

Read waterfield's "first philosophers"
Read iliad/odyssey

If you want to get to Plato ASAP, that's all you need beforehand. Familiarity with greek history and drama will add a tiny bit to your experience, but not really, and any reference to any other poetry (including drama) will be a quote explicitly stating where it's from.

As for Plato just start reading. Start with the euthyphro/apology/crito/phaedo but after that just do whatever. Don't read Republic first, read Laws last if at all. Take notes if you want a better chance at understanding and remembering. Read some companion(s) after you're done with whatever Plato you plan to read.

Continuum companion is a real quick and dirty overview of Plato as a man, his background, the history involved, brief overviews of his dialogues, and short (

>Some just aren't very good.
Should clarify that I mean that the two cambridge companions are compilations of about 15 essays each. Some essays are great, some are okay, a few were really dull. There's no way to tell until you've read them, so it's a bit hit or miss.

>I have a decent knowledge of the Socratic method

*chortle*

>I think it's better time spent If i skip the pre-socratics and go straight to Plato
what the fuck? no, read the fragments of the presocratics, there's not even that many