Tfw you started with the greeks

This.

>tfw you started with the nazis

>tfw you haven't even started yet

>he actually reads hegel

lo

Iktf, user.
I started over one year ago and I'm now only getting to the Epicureans.
Probably have to re-read Aristotle too because the De Anima and Metaphysics are so complicated.

>he didn't start with the acheulean tool complex and hand stencils in caves

>tfw when you read everything in order and study history and you understand everything the author is talking about, the works he has read, and the ideas he's encountered

I want to start with WW1, what do I read?

The Greeks

Also someone post that starting with the greeks infographic thing

>reading in English

>tfw started with cultural analyses of the biological composition of the first single cell organisms

>tfw even got a Greek gf to prepare for starting with the Greeks but neither her nor her family know enough about the Ancient Greeks

What's wrong with starting with the greeks? It's kind of your own fault if you don't eventually move on once it's satisfied your interest.

What is this face supposed to convey?

You have to read every single important Greek text before moving on to the Romans then the Christians, etc until finally you get to the 20th century when you're 80.

If you deviate, you wont understand the influences on later thinkers.

>tfw almost finished with the Greeks

>tfw you just read whatever books have the coolest names and/or covers

>tfw you didnt read the Greeks in Greek
whoops. there's your problem

>tfw u reed buks wif coolis picshurs

source for pic related?

>tfw started and finished with Stirner
I don't have time for your ghost stories, kids

>tfw don't care about forcing myself through the classics and I just read what I like

Courtesy smile

This. I don't know why people take such issue with studying philosophy in the right order.

>tfw i started with nietzsche and looked up all the references he makes

kek

wistful affection. has autism.

Well, this thread turned into brainlet excuses quite fast

>I've only read one philosopher.
>lol ur so sppooked.
Ah yes, Stirner the guy who makes stupid people feel deep.

There's a difference between "looking up references" and actually understanding the depth of those he refers to. You have a false sense of confidence in your reading comprehension.

>not following the context
I bet you're real good at comprehending your wiki articles

lel you are not getting me in reading all that greek stuff. you can understand it in the context of nietzsches writing, otherwise you can dig deeper for a better understanding, easy as that.

chill out brainlet, no one cares

Easy. Your context:
>not even reading in greek

And that's an (ironic) courtesy smile.

looks like you care enough to reply with silly insults

>tfw you started over a year ago and still haven't read the Greeks but are on your 3rd history of philosophy

Underrated post, file name is the cherry on top

/thread

This one? It's pretty easy to just google search the image.

You are the true patricians

Fuck off faggot, I read what I like

Which histories of philosophy have you read? I read Durant's The Story of Philosophy and it was alright, though very obviously biased in some ways

This

true... ultimately why I can't fully appreciate Walden by Thoreau, despite reading it multiple times

If you start with the Greeks, read the plays for Pete's sake. And Homer of course. Don't just read philosophy.

>tfw started with the pre-Socratics and now the universe is made of fire

I feel like the Greeks are a bit too disconnected from modern times.

I mean i read them, but you could start with the Romans and it is pretty much and unbroken chain of well documented events leading up until today.

> Russell.
Shit tier but a good primer, made me want to study history along with philosophy. It's obviously biased and a bit annoying at times.
>A new history of western philosophy - Anthony Kenny.
Beautifully organized and dense at parts. I read it twice.
>Copleston.
This is where I began, I made it to modern philosophy before I realized that I needed to begin with something more basic, thus Russell. This time around I can see the magic, it's good times.

I probably won't read copleston twice, though I'm tempted. I'll probably read Campbell's "the masks of god" series before I start with the Greeks. Also I have a "western civ" text by spielvogel sitting on my shelf that would probably help tie things together nicely.

How the hell do you figure that? If anything the Greeks prove how nothing has changed in humanity. (With the exception of tech.)

It just seem like a thin line between fantasy and reality at that point. Take that big rock inscribed that it was lifted, we cant tell if they really did or not. Romans on the other hand have a very literal history excluding the figure of Jesus and maybe a few others.

not until the ekpyrosis, bitch
keep reading!

>falling for the Stirner meme

>Tfw illiterate

How slow do you read?!

>tfw you started with Harry Potter

literally nothing wrong with that

>tfw you became so obsessed with the greeks you learned greek by yourself and after 15 years you are still with the greeks and you learned modern greek by yourself too and you are with the modern greeks too

>tfw you haven't read any greeks at all

fucking kek how have I not seen this before

>tfw started with the hindus

>not reading Harry Potter in ancient Greek

>tfw started with Wittgenstein
>tfw ended with Wittegenstein

>start with the Greeks
>volume of philosophical production grows in direct proportion to global GDP since the industrial revolution
>entire lifetime is spent playing catch up with Western thought
>can't converge the series within own lifespan
>the industrial revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race

fucking spoiler that shit. Jesus Christ.

Which plays?

>when you're 80
t. brainlet

>tfw you just read what interests you

>tfw started with YA

Holy shit I was just about to make a thread on this!

I'm on Spinoza rn, but I'm sick of this. Should I just start reading what I like now??

Building houses with NO foundations was humanity's longest tradition, until the fucking chalcolithics.

once you've got to the 20th century you can start on the 21st

>tfw only read the first chapter of any book because you get bored of the rest.

>not starting with the akkadians

>one poem and some no-name myths
wew

do you want to build a house on weak foundations? skip it and you'll never understand when someone references them

May as well read the Bible.

the more things you read, the more they are all saying the same thing

I want to have sex with that thing

>tfw willfully chose to start with the Greeks and am enjoying it immensely to this day.
>tfw brainlets get bored reading it and wonder why it's mandatory.

Kek. I'm on Spinoza too. Just finished Descartes.

>Not watching the autistic ranting of guy ellis
logostal.com
How do you faggots feel about the post jungian absurdist hyper-mytholigism
m.youtube.com/watch?v=XlepYvk185o
Skip to 26 minutes his theories are far fetched but very interesting

See

This. It's a great ride.

>tfw try to start with the greeks but the latter classicals and the medievals had access to works of classical literature that I will never ever be able to read so I can never truly underdstand the artistic and philosophical conversation through the ages

>When you start with the Greeks and you willingly add more than what's usual during and after.

>tfw ended with the greeks