"Further, no one can truly grasp Heidegger without a deep understanding of Kierkagaard. Sygdommen til Døden is foundational to "Sein un Zeit." Without mastering the subtleties of Kierkagaard, you will never glean the key insights from Heidegger that the essence of your work with Derrida demands.
Of course, you will need to learn Danish...
...But in order to understand the Epic of Gilgamesh, you'll first have to comprehend the cave paintings and sculpture produced during the Upper Paleolithic. Without a total grasp of the cave paintings at Lascaux, you'll never be able to contextualize the oral tradition that produced Gilgamesh, leaving you without a full knowledge of the Septuagint, making your reading of Kierkegaard incomplete, making your reading of Heidegger & Derrida faulty.
Of course, you'll need to learn Proto-Indo-European."
So, over about a dozen posts I'm going to pick out a philosophical lineage and struggle with it in public, for yr gratification and edification. It ends up looking "Continental" but isn't Continental (nor German idealist, empiricist, sceptic, existentialist, phenomenologist) as far as methods are concerned. It's neither comprehensive history nor arbitary cherrypick. It's not meant to be a canon (nor would most of these folk accept any such thing).
"I'm just trying to be a better person."
- My Name Is Earl