/lit/ - Literature

>invents quantum theory and fascism before Socrates was even a glint in his father’s eye
Heh nothin personal kiddo

I think I might be a psycho, and I don't know what to do about it. I have recurrent day dreams about eating women. I don't mean cunnilingus, I mean cannibalism. I have sickly dreams swallowing women whole, starting with their arms. At first, they were just occasional nocturnal visions, then they slowly progressed frequent daydreams. I am nowhere near educated enough to make heads or tails of what the fuck this is all about, so I thought a well-educated board like /lit/ might help.

>The learning of many things teacheth not understanding, else would it have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hekataios
/lit/ eternally BTFO

>The learning of many things teacheth not understanding, else would it have taught Hesiod and Pythagoras, and again Xenophanes and Hekataios
/lit/ eternally BTFO

>>18796411
18
Heinrich Böll's Like a Bad Dream
Aristotle's Physics

>There is no heaven or hell
Why did the Greeks find this notion "obscure"?

>war good

XCIV
Lifetime is a child at play, moving pieces in a game. Kingship belongs to the child.

>Lifetime: aion, vitality, life; lifetime, duration, time; cognate with aiei, forever.
>moving pieces: pesseuon, playing pessoi, a board game perhaps involving dice, like back- gammon and modern Greek tavli.

>Aion has the sense Vitality', '(human) life', as when Pindar calls the soul 'the image of [the man's] aion' (fr. 116 Bowra). On this sense is based the standard usage of the word for 'lifetime', 'duration (of a life)', which, under the influence of the cognate adverb aiei ('always', 'forever') eventually makes aion a synonym for 'time' (chronos). Finally, in Plato's Timaeus and thereafter, aion acquires the technical sense of timeless 'eternity' as contrasted with temporal duration. This later technical sense is irrelevant here. But the whole range of other meanings, from human lifetime to larger temporal periods, are all properly suggested by the name of the player whose game includes both the movements of human life and death and the back-and-forth reversals of the cosmos.

>It is obvious why the player possesses 'kingship', since the game is a cosmic one, and the player must be lord of the universe, like the pilot who 'steers all things' according to LIV (D. 41) and CXIX (D.64). Now the only other text where this ruling principle is called 'king' is LXXXIII (D. 53), where War is 'father of all and king of all', appointing some as gods, others as men, some slave, others free. If we bear in mind the equation-by-transposition of mortals and immortals in XCII, we see that the games played by Lifetime and by War have the same structure. Just as the bow, whose work is death, is named 'life' (bios), so the king of conflict and destruction can be called 'lifetime' (aion).

Can godhood only be attained through the playing of games, as Heraclitus suggests?

Hey /lit/, just getting into philosophy, read The Republic, plan on doing Plato's Parmenides next, should I bother reading the presocratics or just read Plato's books on em. If I should bother, which books best encapsulate their ideas.

itt brainlet who thinks he can comprehend how and why things are in the universe

>Out of every one hundred men, ten shouldn't even be there, eighty are just targets, nine are the real fighters, and we are lucky to have them, for they make the battle. Ah, but the one, one is a warrior, and he will bring the others back