Did you start with the Greeks? What are your thoughts on it?

Did you start with the Greeks? What are your thoughts on it?

Attached: 1559606634.jpg (3240x3600, 1.04M)

Yes and I've stayed with them for 7 years and counting

I’m still on if, kind of. Takes a bit of time.

I never use the charts, as they are stupid and memes. I typically go with what is most influential and most thought provoking.

I’m currently reading Prior Analytics by Aristotle. Fascinating text, and even more fascinating uses of argumentum reductio ad absurdums. Would recommend, just read Metaphysics prior. :3

I did. It was an unrelieved tedium which I would not care to repeat.

If you're not a strict completionist, I would recommend sticking with Homer, The Tragedians, the major philosophers, and maybe one or two Greek historians. Everything else is just adornment for your intellectual life.

There is no point is reading anything before the Greeks. This image is a complete waste of time.

Attached: 1559607204.jpg (3000x3868, 758K)

Making my way through the meme charts, I've read Homer, Hesiod, Herodotus, Aeschylus, Sophocles, most of Euripides, and some Aristophanes and Plato so far.

I've gotten a little burned out on it to be honest. I can't read too much of it in a row anymore so my progress in it will probably slow down even further. I have discovered some of my favorite works through it though (the Iliad, the Oresteia, Herodotus), so I don't regret reading it.

How do they know the names of the people who wrote those books and do they have their pictures? (Doubt it)

you can't be serious. does toby wilkinson sound like an egyptian name to you?

Seriously the most pretentious shit is "start with the greeks". Someone who doesn't read regularly won't be able to fully understand the greeks let alone have the patience to read through them.
"Start with the greeks" is a pseud-lit meme and I fucking hate every faggot who pretends they started with muh greeks. Fuck off and start naming the novels you read in highschool pseuds.

Attached: FUCK OFF.jpg (474x346, 17K)

You misunderstand what is meant by "start with the greeks." It is in reference to philosophy, not anything else. Comprehension is a prerequisite.

This
people who start reading general literature with the Greeks are sadly misguided.

>I don't read so everybody must be as dumb as I am
shut up faggot

I thought the point of the meme was to purposedly misguide newcomers.

This is what everyone should begin with, and then move on to

Attached: Trivium.png (1351x1054, 437K)

then what do you recommend i start with then?

Yeah, someone who doesn't read regularly should start with Kant or even Hegel, it's not like philosophy is mostly accumulative.

Whatever you want bud

Moby Dick is a good one

To learn how to read? Fiction is usually useful for that.

For philosophy? Go read what you think you might like, poorly understand them and realise that philosophers mostly respond to other philosophers, all the way back to Plato/Aristotle, and now you have discovered yourself why you need to start with the Greeks.

Literature? Whatever you like then.

Entered the philosophy program at my university awkwardly, and have hardly read any Greeks. Was able to do just fine reading the moderns, but I do know I'm missing out on something. I only really plan to complete Plato and Heraclitus, although with Aristotle's freakish influence I feel like I'm doing something wrong if I avoid him.

However, it's worth noting that for whoever it is you want to eventually study, they often make explicit reference to their influences. Philosophy doesn't move on a unified track, there are all sorts of flavor packages for different attitudes and thinking styles.

cant someone just summarize the greeks really good and then I skip them

Why don't you also skip the works that you wanted to read after you read the Greeks? There's no fun in that right?
If you want to read philosophy then it means you like philosophy, so in that case you should stop treating the older philosophers as plain interfaces that will allow you to engage with the newer ones.

>that one reddit nigga still seething over "start with the greeks" not being a literature starter chart
read the fucking sticky already

Attached: 1557770680562.png (2048x1536, 3.48M)

>Why don't you also skip the works that you wanted to read after you read the Greeks? There's no fun in that right?
that is pretty much what I do now

>Someone who doesn't read regularly won't be able to fully understand the greeks

Attached: 1546550271569.jpg (500x363, 39K)

er, no it isn't. haven't you heard of a classical education before?
& until about 100 years ago you would read greek & latin before you read english literature in school.

greeks are faggot pedophiles

awww mootykins

and?

Edith Hamilton mythology was surprisingly fun and got me to explore Campbell/Jungian stuff

This is the required minimum of that chart

Attached: 1559657132.jpg (3240x3600, 794K)

>the odyssey but not the iliad
What?

Attached: 1558283806693.jpg (720x681, 60K)

Think before posting. The image shows the required pathway. Anything on the path is required.

A paradox. You think you are progressing but you are really not, and thus Start with the Greeks is fundamentally anti-Greek in its form.
You don't start with the Golden-souled and then progress to the Iron-, that just makes you Iron-souled.

Attached: Start with the Gr-.jpg (1315x3221, 571K)

I read some Plato, then Aristotle, then some Neoplatonists and reverted back to Greek Comedy, because it's genuinely funny compared to modern shit and I needed a laugh after the Neoplatonism.

Yeah, and Iliad is not on the path.

Which I don’t disagree with by the way, :3

Props to The Histories though. Great read right there.

What is the consesus of pic related? Anyone read it ?

Attached: 1538365580079.jpg (253x400, 23K)

as one user put it
>philosophers affirm, negate or transform a previous philosopher’s ideas. You will not understand Aristotle if you do not read Plato first for example.

starting with the greeks is both a meme and not at the same time

Certain Platonic dialogues are necessary reads, that is for sure.

For instance, the Timaeus is absolutely necessary before embarking on Metaphysics.

:3

Start with Nietzsche, and read no other philosophers. It worked for me, so it can work for you.

Attached: 1523569849060.jpg (540x535, 60K)

My thoughts are that you should start with the Hyperboreans.

Slavic Vedas ftw

their place in mythology is discussed briefly in the early section of Edith Hamilton's 'mythology', which is one of the first books in OP's picture, its likely placed in other works on there as well that I hadn't read, you redundant nibba

I know the guy who wrote the Epic of Gilgamesh

and here's why that's a good thing

Yeah, Nimro

Should I start with the Indo-Europeans or with the Greeks?

Attached: file.png (650x619, 317K)

See . "Start with the indo-europeans" is idiotic. This isn't a history course. The purpose of this is to read great works from the beginning up to the present day. If you don't have the education of the Trivium, your efforts will be squandered by your own lack of education. Everything that matters now began with the Greeks from 800 BC onward.

Thanks, user.

>For philosophy? Go read what you think you might like, poorly understand them and realise that philosophers mostly respond to other philosophers, all the way back to Plato/Aristotle, and now you have discovered yourself why you need to start with the Greeks.

exactly this
just started reading mythology after years lurking Yea Forums and it's been great. I dont believe what i was missing out, its a whole new form of art way more deep and accurate as any other form such as movies or anime / manga or any other one of these bullshit and its packed of knowledge and metaphors, the way things are described and all these images and reflexions struck on your mind, truly the ultimate escape to reality way above VR or some bullshit
cant wait to finish this and move on to the illiad, fucking great...

When do Norse myths come into play? After the Romans?

>When do Norse myths come into play?
They don't because they are nigger-tier.

Attached: 1545690310417.jpg (365x365, 56K)

This image always depresses me. All my life, I haven’t had the reading, thinking, and writing capabilities that I could have had. But to start over from the beginning is almost embarrassing, and the time it takes to really absorb all this stuff isn’t helping my lack of motivation. I just finished my first year as a math major, acing all my classes while understanding and remembering half of what I should. Now I slumber all day, wasting time on Yea Forums, overwhelmed at the thought of reading geometry, algebra, trig, and calculus books just so I can finally say I understand all the prerequisite math for my classes this semester. And at the same time, I’m also interested by reading all the philosophers and theologians with cool sounding names and systems of thought, but I haven’t even read the Bible or the Greeks. What good was my 12 years of public education? All my knowledge is superficial, an illusion of superiority over the average person, when I hardly know anything more than him. I’ve been gifted with superior reasoning, but this is mostly genetic, and not my or anyone else’s doing. But I feel wronged in other aspects of my academic skills.

Attached: 4EF052A1-402A-4C34-B531-D6708EBD2278.jpg (750x1036, 148K)

My philosophy progress went like

Julius Evola > Rene Guenon > Nietzche > Kierkegaard > Schopenhauer > Saint Augestine

At this point I realized I actually needed to go back and read the greeks because they're all replying to each other and it ultimately started with the greeks

>Greeks
Only plato

Start with the Greeks is the answer to "Where do I start with philosophy?" not "Where do I start reading?" For that I recommend Dr. Seuss lmao. In order to get anywhere with anything, you have to turn it into a habit; motivation is a short lived meme. Read what you like the best until you're reading every day and then you're ready to start with the greeks.

How old are you? If you did your 1st year as math major in a normal time(so around 18) you're very young. Or do you think the average 20 year old has mastered calculus and philosophy? Don't be stressed.

I’m 19. I don’t really think about the average person much. I think about people like Mill, who was likely not genetically gifted, yet was reading Plato in the original Greek at 8 years old. I’m not saying I should have done that, but it would have been nice to actually know about math and literature rather than putting in no effort throughout school yet being called a genius. Even in my freshman year in college, I had a strange predicament: I knew that I didn’t have to actually pay attention in classes or study for hours because I could always look over some stuff the day before the test, make a high A, then forget the stuff a few weeks later. So, one one hand, I knew that I didn’t have to put much effort into my classes, but I also felt wrong and stressed about the possibility that i might have slacked off too much (I never did). I know i can’t just keep doing this as I advance in my major. I do remember math more than other stuff, like history, but I just remember the process, not the actual proofs of anything.

I just don’t know what to do, where to start. I’m living life on easy mode, and for this, I feel stressed.

it took me 2 pages of evola to realize i cant understand shit and that i have to START WITH THE GREEKS IMMEDIATELY.
The part about drugs in ride the tiger immediately put disgust about my past drug use in me though.

clearly put together by someone who doesn't know anything about the classics. looks like they've read the wikipedia and picked the first books they found on google.