/jp/ - Otaku Culture

[Anonymous No.]

Is 2D the Socratic Ideal Form?

[Anonymous No.]

Yes

[Jumble of hate and !LoveLfcKaA No.]

>>8839681
Everything that can be seen, tasted, heard, felt or smelt is not ideal.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8839697
Feel this, Nerdlinger.

[Anonymous No.]

They're called Platonic forms, not Socratic.

Go back to school.

[Anonymous No.]

Have you ever read the Symposium or the Phaedrus?

Socrates, according to Plato, just wanted a fucking waifu.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8843656
Do you think he found her in afterlife?

[Anonymous No.]

>>8839882
>considering esoteric philosophy of any academic relevance
come back to me when you are solving differential equations bro

[Anonymous No.]

>>8843656

If anything, the concept of a waifu (in which one feels a deep bond to the object of affection as opposed to merely having a favorite female character) is much more closer to Jung's anima than the Forms.

The Forms aren't directly perceivable, and aren't merely aesthetic representations but truth itself. Most waifus are represented quite aesthetically and in the flesh, still within the realm of the phenomena. Additionally, they aren't quite ideal as idealized. If a waifu would be in the realm of Forms, it would be the at the last stage of development of the anima, the Sophia:

>Complete integration has now occurred, which allows females to be seen and related to as particular individuals who possess both positive and negative qualities. The most important aspect of this final level is that, as the personification "Wisdom" suggests, the anima is now developed enough that no single object can fully and permanently contain the images to which it is related.

Though, that description doesn't seem representative of most people who have waifus.

Also, Plato wrote a lot of shit about Socrates, using him as a mouthpiece for his theories. Not all of it was factually accurate with the real Socrates.

>>8843707

>thinks ancient Greek philosophy which is the foundation of most of Western thought is "esoteric"

[Anonymous No.]

>>8843741
talking about the works of some dead speakers and then putting it to a higher level of appreciation than the works of gauss, newton, archimedes, etc is laughable bro

[Anonymous No.]

Socrates was a true NEET.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8843789

They're both valuable; but I have to agree science is far more important and useful. Keep in mind that philosophy was the forerunner of the scientific method, and that it's important to keep in mind the context in which any of these were developed or conceived.

I'm sure you probably realize this already, though. Just saying.

[Anonymous No.]

Socrates was a fictional character.

[Anonymous No.]

>>8843812
it's just when people try to establish their dominance based on knowledge of something as personal as philosophy that i have to question why.
i mean i love philosophy, but it should be something that enriches your life and makes you more open to the ideas of others, not that which requires you to strictly adhere to the rules laid down by great minds of the past.
and i believe philosophy itself has evolved over the years in as science became more imperial and our tools for testing have become more sophisticated.

[Anonymous No.]

Sex is physically impossible in 2d. There's no depth. You can't put anything inside anything else. You could rub against each other though, I guess, if you're into that.