For Philosophers only: Which ones to read first?

Question

I have some books that I am thinking about on which one to read first. They are:

Critique of Pure Reason- Kant
Being and Time- Heidegger
Being and Nothingness- Sartre
Deconstruction and Philosphy- On Derrida's thought
Margins of Philosophy- Derrida
Limited Inc.- Derrida

Should I go from earliest to latest or begin deconstruction then deconstruct from there?

Answer 1

You know what you want to read. You just don't know that you know. Read the first few pages of each. Then set them all next to each other. You'll pick up one of them.

Asking which part of philosophy to start with is like asking whether you should eat the crust or the middle of a piece of pizza first. I say that since it's sometimes hard to know when you'll be full, you eat the part you want to eat first.

Answer 2

All of the philosophers you mention are hard reading. They are from the continental tradition in philosophy, so in addition to being translated from other languages, they deal with subject matter which analytic philosophers see to be quite arcane.

Of the ones you mention, the only one I would recommend is Kant, as his influence on philosophy has been profound. If you decide to plunge into them all, do read something by Ludwig Wittgenstein first - that will offer a nice critical perspective of what is to come.

If you have not read philosophy before, you may find it helpful to read Bertrand Russell. His writing is very approachable, as is that of John Rawls. For joy of reading, I would also recommend Locke, Berkeley, Hume, and Descartes.

If you want to dip your feet in particular philosophical topics and themes, rather than read particular authors, I recommend you start with online sources such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and also read recent short journal articles in the subjects that interest you.

If you just have a hankering to read the Greats, then it doesn't matter where you start... but you can't go wrong with Plato.

Answer 3

Why would anyone want to waste their time with that post-modern, relativistic and pseudo-intellectual, Derrida? That pious, obscurant drivel has been exposed many times for what it is; pure BS. Is he still massacring quantum mechanics? Start with Kant. Heidegger and Sartre are readable, but run from Derrida, as if from a house fire.

Answer 4

I would probably start with Kant and end with Heidegger. What you do in the middle is really up to you. I just think that Kant really lays a good foundation and Heidegger will probably be a good close.

And your phrase at the bottom is hilarious. You should "begin deconstruction then deconstruct from there."

Answer 5

Definitely Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre, which is about man's place in the Universe.
To be quite honest, I wouldn't waste my time with any of the others. I've read Being and Time and the Critique of Pure Reason and I can't say they've brought me a lasting benefit. These books are based on the idea of certainty - the same idea of certainty which drove Descartes. As such, their main characteristic is that their reason of coming into existence has more to do with their authors' pretensions and vanity than their desire to be wise (and hence philosophical).

Answer 6

I don't know if you're good in philosophy, but Kant is supposed to be indigestible. You usually read it IF you HAVE TO. And, apparently, Derrida is not that great. A lot of b*llshit. But I've never read him, so I wouldn't know.

Answer 7

forget sartre. the only decent thing he wrote was "no exit"

you should read heidegger, but start with his metaphysics. if you've already read that, then either being or time, or the critique of pure reason by kant would be fine.