/lit/ - Literature

>>23269820
>T.H. Irwin, ‘Moral science and political theory in Aristotle’, History of Political Thought, 6 (1985), 150-68
>D. Keyt, ‘Three basic theorems in Aristotle’s Politics’, in Keyt & Miller
>W. Kullmann, ‘Man as a political animal in Aristotle’, in Keyt & Miller
>* J. Lear, Aristotle: The Desire to Understand (1988)
>F.D. Miller, Jr, ‘Naturalism’, in CHGRPT, pp. 321-42
>R.G. Mulgan, ‘Aristotle and the value of political participation’, Political Theory, 18 (1990), 195-215
>———, ‘Aristotle’s analysis of oligarchy and democracy’, in Keyt & Miller
>* W.R. Newell, ‘Superlative virtue: the problem of monarchy in Aristotle’s Politics’, in Lord & O’Connor
>M.C. Nussbaum, ‘Shame, separateness, and political unity: Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’, in Rorty
>———, The Fragility of Goodness (1986), chs 11-12
>J. Ober, ‘Aristotle’s politics and society: class, status, and order in the Politics’, in Lord & O’Connor
>* ———, Political Dissent in Democratic Athens: Intellectual Critics of Popular Rule (1998), chs 1, 6
>* J. Roberts, ‘Justice and the polis’, in CHGRPT, pp. 344-65
>* C. Rowe, ‘Aristotelian constitutions’, in CHGRPT, pp. 366-89
>M. Schofield, ‘Equality and hierarchy in Aristotle’s thought’, in his Saving the City (1999), ch. 6
>* ———, ‘Aristotle: an introduction’, in CHGRPT, pp. 310-20
>R.F. Stalley, ‘Aristotle’s criticism of Plato’s Republic’, in Keyt & Miller
>B.S. Strauss, ‘On Aristotle’s critique of Athenian democracy’, in Lord & O’Connor
>B. Yack, The Problems of a Political Animal: Community, Justice and Conflict in Aristotelian Political Thought (1993)

A3 CICERO
>J. Annas, ‘Cicero on Stoic moral philosophy and private property’, in M. Griffin and J. Barnes eds., Philosophia Togata (1989)
>E.M. Atkins, ‘Domina et regina virtutum: justice and societas in De officiis’, Phronesis, 35 (1990), 258-89
>* E.M. Atkins, ‘Cicero’, in CHGRPT, ch. 24
>P.A. Brunt, ‘Laus imperii: conceptions of empire prevalent in Cicero’s day’, in P. Garnsey and C.R. Whittaker, eds, Justice and Generosity (1995)
>J.E. Holton, ‘Marcus Tullius Cicero’, in L. Strauss and J. Cropsey, eds, History of Political Philosophy, 2nd edn (1973)
>W.K. Lacey and B. Wilson, Res Publica: Roman Politics and Society According to Cicero (1970)
>G. Lesser, ‘Virtue and the goods of fortune in Stoic moral theory’, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 7 (1989), 95-128
>* A.A. Long, ‘Cicero’s politics in De officiis’, in Justice and Generosity, ed. A. Laks and M. Schofield (1995)
>P. MacKendrick, The Philosophical Books of Cicero (1989), chs 1, 4, 11, 19
>E. Rawson, Cicero (1975)
>———, Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic (1985)
>F.H. Sandbach, The Stoics (1975), chs 3, 9.
>M. Schofield, ‘Epicurean and Stoic political thought’, in CHGRPT, ch. 22

I've noticed that at this point I'm so more used with dealing with "intelligent themes" through text that right now if someone asks me online about a particular author, thinker or politician I can probably write something interesting, BUT if I'm asked the same thing about the same subject irl I choke completely.

Every time I debate philosophy for example I come off as a high schooler with a wikipedia-tier understanding. Even when it's a subject I know a lot about I can only express it through text.

Have you guys found any way of cementing this gap between eloquence in writing and speaking? Does anyone else experience this at all?