11-30-2017, 12:00 AM
Le_Regard wrote:
Julio Juliopolis wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
The real Socrates, it turns out, was a veteran of three different wars. Old school wars, the kind you fought with swords and horses.
Why do you think Plato left that out, so that no one knows that and everyone paints Plato's Socrates completely differently?
Well it's NOT left out actually, it's in The Charmides, but Philosophy 101 courses don't generally teach The Charmides.
Hmmm, how do you think Plato arranged for Philosophy 101 classes to avoid The Charmides?
I was more wondering how YOU managed to avoid The Charmides.
Pro tip - The emphasis on "you" in there isn't as dramatic unless you actually point at me while saying it.
I don't know. Maybe you're an astral time traveling wizard and you and Pythagoras get drunk together on the weekends, and you know all about.
Don't dox me bro.
But your assessment that we have solved the problem of what Plato really thought, and that apparently he thought a lot of about elements and regular solids, is at best false.
However, if you want to have a long discussion on what Laws are, how they work, and why we have them, that's fine with me too.
My understanding is that most responsible philosophers would tell you that provoking such a discussion, and not recording his opinions for posterity, was the intent behind writing in dialogue form.
Some philosophers might argue that sneaking "responsible" in there before describing those who agree with you is just a hidden ad hominem argument against those who don't. Aristotle wrote about that tactic. I guess he must have been one of those irresponsible philosophers then.
And I'm not just trying to be a jerk about this, I'm just saying this like it's a fact, but I don't think you've read Heraclitus either. That's fine, not everybody alive has to read Heraclitus, but I didn't bring it up.
Everything we know about what Heraclitus thought is written down in REALLY cryptic aphorisms that don't even make a lot of sense in the original Greek.
I haven't read them myself, however when I consider your claim that those writings are REALLY cryptic aphorisms that don't make a lot of sense in the original Greek, I find it impossible not to keep in mind how you seem to fare at interpreting the straightforward things I write in today's English.
"Nature loves to conceal herself"
"War is the Father and King of All"
"Everyday the Sun is new"
That's what Heraclitus thought.
The first one is self-explanatory. I can see several ways in which the 2nd could be true, I'd have to see it in context. The 3rd one is something Heraclitus talked about a lot. That being that everything is always changing, (another famous quote of his along that order is "One cannot step into the same stream twice"). But really who cares?
Look, I will TEACH YOU Neo-Platonism if you want. I'm not trying to put you down. I'll lift you up if you like, but don't tell me what Plato really thought.
*yawn*
"Though this Word is true evermore, yet men are as unable to understand it when they hear it for the first time as before they have heard it at all. For, though, all things come to pass in accordance with this Word, men seem as if they had no experience of them, when they make trial of words and deeds such as I set forth, dividing each thing according to its nature and showing how it truly is. But other men know not what they are doing when awake, even as they forget what they do in sleep."
Heralitus, Fragment #1
"Word" here is a form of Logos, by the way, I looked it up.
(Edit - 10 posts in a row by Le_Regard condensed to 1 - Julio)
Julio Juliopolis wrote:
Le_Regard wrote:
The real Socrates, it turns out, was a veteran of three different wars. Old school wars, the kind you fought with swords and horses.
Why do you think Plato left that out, so that no one knows that and everyone paints Plato's Socrates completely differently?
Well it's NOT left out actually, it's in The Charmides, but Philosophy 101 courses don't generally teach The Charmides.
Hmmm, how do you think Plato arranged for Philosophy 101 classes to avoid The Charmides?
I was more wondering how YOU managed to avoid The Charmides.
Pro tip - The emphasis on "you" in there isn't as dramatic unless you actually point at me while saying it.
I don't know. Maybe you're an astral time traveling wizard and you and Pythagoras get drunk together on the weekends, and you know all about.
Don't dox me bro.
But your assessment that we have solved the problem of what Plato really thought, and that apparently he thought a lot of about elements and regular solids, is at best false.
However, if you want to have a long discussion on what Laws are, how they work, and why we have them, that's fine with me too.
My understanding is that most responsible philosophers would tell you that provoking such a discussion, and not recording his opinions for posterity, was the intent behind writing in dialogue form.
Some philosophers might argue that sneaking "responsible" in there before describing those who agree with you is just a hidden ad hominem argument against those who don't. Aristotle wrote about that tactic. I guess he must have been one of those irresponsible philosophers then.
And I'm not just trying to be a jerk about this, I'm just saying this like it's a fact, but I don't think you've read Heraclitus either. That's fine, not everybody alive has to read Heraclitus, but I didn't bring it up.
Everything we know about what Heraclitus thought is written down in REALLY cryptic aphorisms that don't even make a lot of sense in the original Greek.
I haven't read them myself, however when I consider your claim that those writings are REALLY cryptic aphorisms that don't make a lot of sense in the original Greek, I find it impossible not to keep in mind how you seem to fare at interpreting the straightforward things I write in today's English.
"Nature loves to conceal herself"
"War is the Father and King of All"
"Everyday the Sun is new"
That's what Heraclitus thought.
The first one is self-explanatory. I can see several ways in which the 2nd could be true, I'd have to see it in context. The 3rd one is something Heraclitus talked about a lot. That being that everything is always changing, (another famous quote of his along that order is "One cannot step into the same stream twice"). But really who cares?
Look, I will TEACH YOU Neo-Platonism if you want. I'm not trying to put you down. I'll lift you up if you like, but don't tell me what Plato really thought.
*yawn*
"Though this Word is true evermore, yet men are as unable to understand it when they hear it for the first time as before they have heard it at all. For, though, all things come to pass in accordance with this Word, men seem as if they had no experience of them, when they make trial of words and deeds such as I set forth, dividing each thing according to its nature and showing how it truly is. But other men know not what they are doing when awake, even as they forget what they do in sleep."
Heralitus, Fragment #1
"Word" here is a form of Logos, by the way, I looked it up.
(Edit - 10 posts in a row by Le_Regard condensed to 1 - Julio)