/lit/ - Literature

Greek philosophy is best philosophy

bamp

frederick copleston's "history of philosophy" series is good. others will tell you just to jump right in.

Did you read the fucking sticky?

For philosophy, a lot of what you're going to read is more like "history of philosophy." That means that Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, Hume, Hegel, Nietzsche etc. are going to be essential. If you begin at the beginning, you'll have a much more coherent understanding of how philosophical concepts evolved, and the dialogs that have taken place about various ideas.

So start with Plato.

Pre-Law.... Focus on enlightenment thinkers, like Locke and Hobbes.

What about reading what's included in your curriculum?

>>1655968

Curriculum doesn't become available until start of a few of my summer term classes, and then varies by professor. I just wanted to get the gears rolling.

and yes... I've seen the sticky, but was looking for more responses like this >>1655953 (thanks btw)

>>1655982
Okay, what about reading some secondary literature, some intellectual history maybe. So you have good solid grasp of the great picture.

>>1655982
Thomas Hobbes -> John Locke -> bentham -> john stuart mill -> Edmund Burke -> AND MUCH MUCH MORE

>>1656009
what no More would come before all those guys

>>1656024
right, my bad.
Thomas More before all of those.

Also throw in Adam Smith, and david ricardo.

You might also like into Grotius, Rousseau and Alexis de Tocqueville

it's not strictly philosophy but you might do well to look at Gadamer at some point if you're pre-law

I AM JUST POSTING BY TO WRITE THAT THAT MACRO IN OP's POST WAS MADE BY A SUBHUMAN.

>>1656049
is this KOZ? I can't tell because I don't have the character set

>>1656049
No it's not? It's funny. Sorry you don't understand humor?

>>1655912

Your reasoning about majors seems dumb.
But what do I know, I'm just an 18-year-old medical student...

>>1655912
Gave up science and went with sophistry huh? Hey, at least it's popular.

>>1656063

Yeah... Fucking sick of every asshole in science who thinks that they are the next big neurosurgeon when they can barely follow instructions in an orgo-lab. That, and I am not wanting to spend the next decade and a half working towards it all. I have some ties in several law fields who do pretty well, and law was always my first option anyway. The only difference now is that, for law, my path is through philosophy: Something that I have always been semi-interested in but never took the honest time to delve into. I'm looking forward to it, though.

Thanks for all of the suggestions thus far. I'm copying them down to look up later.

>>1656052

YES, I AM KOZ.

>>1656054

WHY DO YOU ADD QUESTION MARKS TO YOUR STATEMENTS.

AND TOO BAD YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THE WORD "SHOPLIFTING"?

>>1656361

This is the OP. I'm not whoever was asking if you are "KOZ" but I will chime in and say that it is YOU who doesn't know the meaning of the word "shoplifting." The original picture's musing is proper. Shoplifting doesn't have to be "from a store." It can also be from a business establishment. A business "establishment" doesn't have to be a building/factory/etc. It can be any place where transactions or services are rendered. A prostitute, albeit typically illegal, can be his/her own business establishment.

Hence, the humor should be easy to find if you ponder even just a bit....

>>1656361
>>1656498
The joke's fine if you aren't a stupid autistic pedant

>>1656498

YES, BUT THOSE ARE MEANINGS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE WORD OVERTIME, OVER CENTURIES (MAYBE) OF BEING AROUND IN THE SEMANTIC OCEAN BUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNIFICANCE WAS/IS THAT OF "LIFTING/TAKING SOMETHING" FROM A "SHOP".

IF YOU ARE GOING TO PLAY WITH WORDS, DO IT PROPERLY.

The "Introducing..." series are pretty decent for signposting relevant philosophers, and are pretty short and cheap. If you want Nietzsche, read Deleuze.

>>1656525

No one gives a flying fuck about the origins of the word. It means what it means right the fuck now and thus, you cannot win this argument by introducing such a perspective shit.

By your logic, the word "nigger" wouldn't be the most offensive word in the English language: That is if we were to consider it's origins whereon, even used as an adjective was not necessarily a deliberate insult.

>>1656525

No one gives a flying fuck about the origins of the word. It means what it means right the fuck now and thus, you cannot win this argument by introducing such a perspective shift.

By your logic, the word "nigger" wouldn't be the most offensive word in the English language: That is if we were to consider it's origins whereon, even used as an adjective was not necessarily a deliberate insult.

>>1656543
>the word "nigger" wouldn't be the most offensive word in the English language

BUT THE WORD "NIGGER" IS NOT THE MOST "OFFENSIVE WORD" IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (IF THAT EXISTS).

>>1656551
Of course there is a most offensive word in the English language, how could there not be? Unless degrees of offensiveness don't exist but if you say that then you're just dumb

>>1656551

I suppose it may not be the most offensive.... Cunt is, arguably, just as offensive. (according to Joe Rogan, anyway) LOL....

Either way, it's Friday night and I am gonna relax and do some reading. No time for arguing. I have my whole life ahead of me for that. :-)

Thanks for all of the suggestions. I'll check the thread once more before bed in case anyone else wants to chime in.

>>1656560


GREAT OBJECTIVIST IRRATIONAL WAY OF THINKING.

EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE; OBJECTIVITY IS RELATIVE; RELATIVITY IS OBJECTIVE.

The most offensive word in the English language is "pants"

possibly not related but I have, for quite some time now, always thought of the practice of law as being:
the attempt to conflate objectivity with an innately subjective world.

i know that this may not help, but perhaps if you think of law along those lines, this could give you a guiding compass as to determine which direction you should take in your philosophical travels.

>>1655912
What if you force sex on her, then pay her her normal going rate?

>>1656574
That would be like eating a thing in a store before you pay for it. Some people might call you an ass for doing it but it's not really that big a deal

>>1656580

lulz

it's rape btw

>>1656574
she's not legally or morally required to do business with you. to fuck her before the agreement's been made is to fuck someone who has not yet consented, ergo, rape.

>>1658902
And it's also shoplifting.

>>1656551
Black guy here, it's not.

>>1658911
she's not automatically open for business by default. it's not a business transaction UNTIL the agreement's been made, and until she agrees to said transaction the sex is not a commodity

>>1658916
White guy here, it is.

>>1658918
Oh, OK, then maybe it's Only rape. Thanks.