I think you missed the whole “currents” bit. I’d put reading Plato on par with reading The Skeptical Chymist or John Dalton’s Chemical Philosophy. I think it’s

I think you missed the whole “currents” bit. I’d put reading Plato on par with reading The Skeptical Chymist or John Dalton’s Chemical Philosophy. I think it’s a miss primary sources like that are absent from most undergraduate degrees in science - they reveal a lot about what science really is. But building an entire undergraduate curriculum on nothing but those primary sources? There’s just too much material and so many of those constructs have failed to accurately describe reality. To use Marxism as an example, Main Currents of Marxism is probably on par with From Atomos to Atom. Both Science and Philosophy could benefit from teaching from currents vs. primary sources (philosophy) and compilations of “facts” (science).