Looking to get into philosophy

Critique of Pure Reason is Kant trying to say there are some core "concepts" built into the human brain (and thus, into philosophy) that can't be broken down into smaller concepts or derived from first principles. Unity vs. multiplicity, for example.

Okay, unity and multiplicity are built into the human brain. Says Kant. Maybe he's wrong. Maybe not. He didn't study the brain to decide that, he just says it. He thinks about alternatives to thought. Maybe there's no universe without knowing unity and multiplicity. Okay, fine.

Now what? What are you gonna do after reading 100 pages about that? What did you learn? You can't process your life without thinking about how unity and multiplicity are basic concepts? Once you've thought of it, you've achieved nothing beyond the initial statement. You're no wiser, but now you have to namedrop Kant all the time because you spent time on his rambling.

Literally start with the greeks, Plato's republic is a nice start, also Politzer's elementary principles of philosophy, which will lay out many concepts that you will encounter through philoshopers.
This but unironically.
Thus Spoke Zarathustra and all of Nietzsche's works are super easy to read.
René Descartes's Discourse on the method.
Kant is a kunt, he used a shitload of words to say the simplest things, still necessary, comes after the empiricists and rationalists.

>Kant/Nietzsche/Hegel/Deleuze

Yes/no/Yes/no

Your capacity to discern is gibberish

>Nietzsche’s works are super easy to read

What do you mean by Philosophy? Answer this and I’ll tell you where to go

Attached: 4AAD006F-25AA-41D0-99FC-9D13CAED1274.jpg (220x310, 11K)

i want to know how other people smarter than me understand life and shit
I have no expectations, I'm willing to get to any conclusion - I guess what I want is 50 years from now to say that even though I still don't understand shit about anything at least I tried to.

t. brainlet

my point was, I don't know if I'm doing right by reading Nietzsche or someone else right from the start.
I'm not big brained enough to fully understand everything the guys says.
So the question is - is there any other way to systematically understand philosophy and different people's opinion about life and shit.

Nietzsche writes beautifully.

Attached: DbXxhQQVAAA5xmR.jpg (1093x767, 71K)

If that's really all you want, then you can read start with reading Plato's Socratic Dialogues and go straight to Stoicism and/or Epicureanism if you're just looking for how people smarter than you "understand life."

There are a plethora of roads you can take from there, but start with the basic foundation of Plato's Socratic dialogues then go to shit you can actually apply and use (thus, Stoicism and Epicureanism)

it's not "just" that. I'm open to anything.

>maybe the other way of going at it would be to ask you guys how you got into philosophy and if you have any tips

If you are doing it casually, there's no way you can cover it all. For example, all I read directly is Political Philosophy and I pick books that discuss it from different angles and going from author to author, you discover new things that make you break out into new areas.

Start small and expand. I'd recommend the collection of essays "The Proper Study of Mankind" by Isiah Berlin. Enough philosophers get name-dropped that you will know where to go from there.

what about something like this? youtube.com/watch?v=Yat0ZKduW18&list=PL9GwT4_YRZdBf9nIUHs0zjrnUVl-KBNSM&index=1

works too, but I have not much patience for presentations, I can read stuff but I can't listen to people

>what’s the password to the WiFi!

cheatersdeservetodie123

docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1

what are you interested in? why do you want to study philosophy?

>shits on penguin
>comes out as a Marxist
fuck off with that garbage

Garbage

ffs guys, what the fuck do I read?

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 21K)

The Phenomenology of Spirit

Start and end with this.

Attached: 1552522376837.png (182x277, 3K)

>beginning at the end of philosophy
yikes

This is why Philosophy departments now only market themselves as giving Critical Thinking Skills (TM). Unless you're doing some combination of Continental/Feminist Philosophy or trying to revive some philosopher everyone forgot about; you're doing something that no one has cared about for 50 years.

this

Plato, Montaigne, Seneca, and Cicero. I don't trust anyone who hasn't read them extensively.

>Study art, language, cooking, building, writing, critical thinking, technical competence, or a trade. Better yet, engage with your community and build collective knowledge and strength.

so start likethe greeks?

First two if you want philosophy. Last two if you want self help books that you don't have to be ashamed to be reading publicly.

Don't bother me with your garbage

>You will not benefit from it, but you'll find yourself pretending you benefit because of how much time you wasted on it.
Sounds like you're a brainlet

>you're doing something that no one has cared about for 50 years.
Because what people care about now must be the end all be all, right? (I don't know if you intended to come off this way or not)

Read at least one history of philosophy book before. Get cultural background from the time the person is question (study Greek myth, read the Bible etc). Pick the subjects you want to learn about and read about them chronologically (this will lead you to start with the greeks most of the time). Read commentary on the authors/texts you study.

Attached: 1558518545225.jpg (1024x1024, 97K)

the person in question is from*
sorry

Philosopy like you have explained it is questioning, that which we perceive and making sense out of it.
Philosophy is what led to Empirical Science as we have it now. It's how the Question and Idea is formed and a consequent Answer to that is formed.
What Kant did with his work was be one of the first to get into the Science of how Human Perception works; Psychology.
Psychology didn't properly exist as a science in his time and his work put a perspective on Human Perception, which not many prior to or in his time did.
Thereby his influence is still in effect up to today being one of the few, that put a new spotlight on the perception of the human mind to the world.
Philosophy puts the Question and Idea for the other Sciences to work with or create new ones.
Philosophy is not so much useless, as your perspective on the History of Philosopy and its relation to other Sciences is narrrow.

That is fine and all, but you've done nothing to defend why someone should pick up Kant and try to understand him. In your argument, all his usefulness has passed

Rationality: From AI to Zombies

readthesequences.com/

Attached: Rationality.jpg (344x499, 44K)