/lit/ - Literature

>>18371717
>subduing God to bare-bones logic
Ishiggydiggy
Aristotle couldn't see beyond Nous, while what he saw was true, to proclaim this as the apex was nothing but arrogance.

"To this one may respond that those men do not in fact employ as their first principles contraries of such a sort as to be insubstantial in the
sense of being inferior to substantiality, but if anything, in the sense of being superior; for the first principles of substantial reality must necessarily be supra-substantial. And in general, those men did not take their start from opposites as such, but they had knowledge of what was beyond the two tables of opposites, as Philolaus bears witness to when he says that God established Limit and Limitlessness, by ‘limit’ indicating the whole sequence of opposites more akin to the One, while by ‘limitlessness’ he indicates the sequence inferior to this, and prior again to these two principles they situated the unitary and completely separable cause, which Archaenetus declares to be a ‘cause above a cause’,while Philolaus asserts that it is ‘cause of all things’, and Brotinus as ‘surpassing all intellect and substance in power and dignity’.398 Taking his start from these, the divine Plato also, in the Letters, in the Republic, in the Philebus, and the Parmenides,399 utters the same sentiments on the same topic. So then, his premisses are not sound, since that one which states that ‘contraries inhere in a substratum’ is false (for if one is to call entities above the level of nature ‘contraries’, they are at all events not insubstantial), and also that one which states that ‘principles are substances’ (for the principles in the proper sense and the principles of all things are actually supra-substantial); nor does the conclusion refute any doctrine maintained by those men; for they did not take their start from opposites as such, but ranked as prior to these the One which transcends both the principles and the columns of opposites."

Also, Aristotle was a Platonist, just autistic about it, like the Stoics after him.

>>16411149
Think you might not grasp how little Greeks replaced the native culture or people. One reason why Christianity flourished in Egypt was because the Egyptian peasants disliked the Hellenes. It was also focused around Alexandria, and neither did greek myth replace the egyptian mythos but Syncretized with it. Serapis, the main god of the later egyptians, was a fusion of Osiris and Apis, which is a continuation of Amun-ra with Greek Zeus aesthetics. Which also parallels with Mithraism and the slaying of the bull and the Aries , which all focused on the Zodiac and the astrological ages.
Which also connects to the Orphic hymns to Dionysus (who was and wasn't his father, or rather: both were the sun, just as in Egypt Ra is every god but each god is not each-other).

I call upon loud-roaring,
reveling Dionysos,
primeval, two-natured,
thrice-born Bacchic lord,
savage, ineffable, secretive, 3
two-horned and two-shaped,
ivy-covered, bull-faced,
warlike, howling, pure.
You take raw flesh in triennial feasts,
wrapped in foliage, decked with grape clusters,
resourceful Eubouleus, 6
immortal god sired by Zeus
when he mated with Persephone
in unspeakable union.
Hearken to my voice, O blessed one,
you and your fair-girdled nurses,
breathe on me in a spirit 9
of perfect kindness.