/lit/ - Literature

>>20700877
>though albeit

>>20080416
First of all, no one living today "has" Heraclitus, as his writings are lost and those who quoted him did so in fragments and/or in paraphrase. To think that you have a better understanding of his thought than his rough contemporaries (who were, moreover, intimately familiar with the cultures by which Heraclitus was shaped) is laughably hubristic. Second, Heraclitus seems to have written using intentional ambiguities (as Plato did with great success, btw), so this lack of context is truly a hermeneutic hurdle for modern readers. Third, even if we can take the testimony of others for granted, it does not change the fact that his lack of attention to fixity leaves his approach to the One and Many wanting. On this issue, Plato gives an excellent (though merely foundational) approach with the Philebus' fourfold ontology. He also demonstrates great critiques against Heraclitean (-ish? no one can really say) thought in the Sophist and Statesman from an Eleatic perspective.
>tl;dr meet me in the Akashic Library and see what happens, bitch

>HE BE GOING CRAZY ON IT
>THEY QUOTES JUST BE LIFE CHANGING
What the fuck am I reading? Why would someone faithfully transcribe this rape of English and not edit it for clarity?

>>17414292