Where do I start with this edgy boy?

...

Other urls found in this thread:

nietzsche.holtof.com/Nietzsche_thus_spake_zarathustra/I_07.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

with the greeks sweetie

Greeks>Descartes>Hume>Kant>Schopenhauer>Nietzsche

Thales

you start by removing the idea of him being edgy

the LGBTQI science

if only Nietsche new some faggots in the 21th century would write him off based on a single meme buzzword he would have had a laff

I bought into the Peterson meme and read Beyond Good and Evil.

People aren't even fucking joking when they say start with the Greeks. I'm working my way up to him. All the references he dropped flew over my head. He refers to so many other works, often to criticise them, it's pointless to rush into reading him. I swallowed my ego and realised I had other stuff I needed to understand what the fuck he was talking about.

From what I read of Nietzsche this isn't a bad place to start

Drop the idea that Nietzsche is edgy, he's maybe contrarian but he had his reasons.

This. He takes alot of time to critique and challenge their ideas. If you want to know what he's talking about you read a bit of these first.

Plato and then The origin of the tragedy.

Is there a list/chart for which works to read of these?

>Greeks>Descartes>Hume>Kant

The only good philosophers.

I thought Hume was a different category to the rest?

Which Plato is "necessary" to understand most other philosophers?

Pretty much all of it. You are reading the foundation texts of western civilisation.

He directly responds to Descartes and Kant directly responds to Hume.

what do you mean? He's not from the continent? Hume is necessary for understanding Kant and the early modern big epistemological debate in general

Nietzsche wrote about him in those book.

The correct term is edgeboy

>not Nietzsche

pleb alert

Do I have to read Descartes before reading Hume?

>Hume
Wonder how I know you're an anglo?

Phaedo, Symposium, Republic.

Also, Euthyphro. Skip The Republic, aside from maybe the cave part.

Also, Symposium is literally just a bunch of dudes poetically speaking about raping boys.

Still relevant because Eros.
....Nothing happens in Eutyphyro other than an exposition of how Socrates worked, senpai.

Do you need to be spoon fed everything? Just google "where to start with the greeks", "where to start with Hume", etc.

Not true, man. Euthyphro really sharpened my pencil when I first read it. It forces you to consider the Greek view of piety and Socrates argument against it. Crucial, especially in context of trying to understand Nietzsche who could have stepped in for Euthyphro in the argument. It forces you to consider whether the gods precede metaphysics or follow the same forms humans do. It's also just a fun, swift read and a thorough torpage, if you feel me there desu.

Uhm sweetie. :) He's not edgy. :)

Tbqh, his "edginess" is one of his greatest qualities. You feel like you could get a beer with him and shit talk old, dead philosophers and their life-denying ways. I think the common meme "edgy" is usually applied to kids who have first discovered iconoclasm and want to look smart by shitting on everything. Nietzsche was extremely well-read and reasoned. Doesn't really apply.

Exactly, he wasn't just shitting on everything that came before, he critiqued while appreciating and respecting what previous traditions and philosophers did.

I started with his later works (Twilight of teh Idols and the Antichrist) and thought that was a pretty good intro. He's pretty succinct by the end, and has gotten better at rephrasing some of his main points. I think the Gay Science is pretty good too, if you like aphorisms. If not, genealogy of morals has some good essays that contain the essence of his moral critiques in longer form. I wouldn't recommend starting with Zarathustra, it's so different from the rest of his work and feels like an outlier. I'd get the Kaufman anthology if I were you and skip Zarathustra the first time you read it.

>Schopenhauer
I took a semester of philosophy and we kinda flew briefly over schopenhauer. From what I recall he hates bitches and thinks the only way to transcend suffering is to listen to baroque music, specifically. Makes me think I could skip him.

Hume>Kant
Which one is the meme?

No memes there.

read stirner. it's like neechee without the schizophrenia.

Which Kaufman anthology, Basic Writings, or The Portable Nietzsche.

His idea of the will is basically what Nietzsche based his whole Will To Power off.

Schopenhauer is a real sad sack of a philosopher, but he's a pretty clear thinker and his World as Will and Representation can stand by itself. You could skip him, but you'd miss out, especially if you're going to read Nietzsche.

I got impatient and read Beyond Good and Evil and really didn't get much out of it. Right now, I'm just gonna read the Veeky Forums starter kit for some time then start with the Greeks.

Holy shit just read the first book that got your attention. You don't need to study the entire western canon in chronological order to derive meaning from a work of art. Study the missing links as you encounter them, follow your own interests. Literature is not a skill tree and you don't need a guide to make sure you get the highest dps.

If you're reading the English translation it's piss easy to grasp anyway.

Do people actually learn a whole other language for a fucking book?

This. Also worth reading up on Nietzsche's correspondence/association with Wagner at least until you start on "Human, All Too Human".

>You don't need to study the entire western canon in chronological order to derive meaning from a work of art.
No, but if you want to derive one that's worth a shit, you do. Also, this is philosophy, not art.

kinda agree with him. nietzsche is really accessible, i've read him in my 2nd language when I was 16

t. insufferable nerd who turns everything he touches into shit

>properly studying and following a conversation since it began with the Ancient Greeks is the same as turning it into shit
Stop being lazy.

>EVERYBODY MUST FOLLOW THE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF EVERYTHING SO THAT THEY WILL UNDERSTAND EVERY REFERENCE IN THE SAME STIFF AUTISTIC NERDY WAY THAT I DO
I suggest you become a librarian or another profession that requires a tight anus.

>hasn't even studied how to make fire, build a wheel and kill a man
>thinks he knows shit about philosophy or can even fathom Nietzsche
Get out of here, pseud

Thanks for supporting Zarathustra's statement on universal literacy.

You're like that teacher who doesn't care about anything but the field they're in but who ended up being a teacher.

This is philosophy, not literature. And philosophy is indeed a skill tree. Start from the beginning, or you're destined to misinterpret texts.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra is not just philosophical.

It's a philosophical text through and through.

>sweetie
gets me every time

Nuh uh.

Philosophy is the world's longest conversation, if you just jump in towards the end you'll be completely lost.

What are you still doing in the marketplace, user :^)

He isn't that edgy. Recognized the coming twilight of Christianity and meaning and got swallowed whole by his attempt to overcome it. There is no glee, mockery, snark of a Voltaire. He was a serious man

>There is no glee, mockery, snark

You haven't read anything by Nietzsche.

Post the quote or shut up

I'M FUCKING SICK OF THE START WITH THE GREEKS AND READ EVERYTHING BEFORE X PHILOSOPHER TO "REALLY" UNDERSTAND HIM MEME
IF YOU HAVE A DECENT READING COMPREHENSION AND LOOK UP THE SHIT THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND YOU CAN JUMP INTO LITERALLY ANYONE
90% OF THE GREEKS WERE RETARDS
RATIONALISM IS LITERALLY FUCKING NOTHING
Nah just memeing

Read Ecce Homo and lurk more, kiddo

I liked the portable

You really should start with the Greeks.

Ya huh

there's a flowchart that's posted pretty often on Veeky Forums but i don't have it saved

For the Greeks start with Homer and Hesiod and maybe a primer on greek mythology, then Sophocles and Aeschylus, then Plato and Aristotle

Not him, but here
nietzsche.holtof.com/Nietzsche_thus_spake_zarathustra/I_07.html

Op, I'd recommend beginning with the book American Nietzsche. It situates him historically and philosophically. The fact that no one has mentioned Emerson suggests the shitposters in this thread probably know very little about Nietzsche.

BG&E isn't that hard to understand as long as you have a layman's understanding of Kant and Schopenhauer.