/lit/ - Literature

>plato was wrong about everything, your mom's fat, you're dumb and will die soon

Gimme a slice of that Western goodness.

>>11839470
Easiest way to spot a pseud is uncritical praise of the eastern mystics.

>>11839485
Platonism is mongol and therefore nigger philosophy. Read Kant for a truly aryan critical system

>>11839505
Other way around bud

>>11839505
Turkic, not Mongol. The steppe peoples of Central Asia are not all one and the same.

>>11839597
Alright show me a critical system among any one of them

>>11839602
Proto-Tengriism taught to the Mongol tribesmen by the Star Aryans during the F-KHW

>.... competing, incoherent, and clashing moralist systems
so this is the power of western """philosophy"""

>>11839597
Kant was probably closer to the Mongols in terms of genetic distance than Plato was.
Plato was most likely of pure Mediterranean/AR1an descent, whereas Kant must've had bits of Germanic/Slavic, Baltic, and even Finno-Ugric blood in him. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd had some of the blood of the Mongol Hordes in him too.
Kant's philosophy was just as much of a mish-mash as his genetic pool. He tried to mix together Rationalist beliefs about a priori knowledge with Hume's absolute empiricism, completely ignoring Locke's tabula rasa.
On the other hand, everything that Plato ever talked about was in reference only to Greek culture, seeing everyone else, like the Egyptians, as important sources of knowledge, but paying little attention to what they actually had to say.

>>11839665
Greeks are Turkish, when Byzantium fell to mehmed rhe conquerorbit reverberated back and forth in time to turn all Greeks into Turks. This is where the ‘meme’ comes from. It is a truth, not a meme. Greeks in classical antiquity drank fermented horse milk, not wine.

>>11839665
lol absolute empiricism is a contradiction in terms you cunt. Kant's is the greatest system known to man. Plato on the other hand is a complete rationalist, who says the "forms" are absolutely and eternally real, and the substantial world is a sad approximation here for no reason at all. Kant completely turned philosophy around away from the auto-fellatio all-is-mind system of the greek rationalists

>>11840014
>>11839665
You’re both morons
Only God is capable of providing philosophical insight
All thought since IESUS has been a shadow

>>11839470
dude you made this exact thread like 2 days ago

also, pretty sure eastern philosophy does not condone "smoke weed and chill". the purpose of "chill" in eastern philosophy is for you to think about things more clearly, not less. to get perspective, not to be numbed. to become more in touch with reality, not more in touch with your porn and video games

>>11840022
God is dead and death is absolute extinction.

>>11840014
Kant's system is autofellatio, 2 worlds is a meme

>>11840044
You are lying
I know this to be the case. When I was younger I had vision. I know.

>>11839470
something tells me you didn't actually read this book at all

>>11840050
Why are you afraid of absolute extinction?

>>11840046
Without the distinction between thing in itself and appearance sensation is an arbitrary and worthless faculty. By abandoning the world of sense Plato makes a fucking triangle as the thing in itself.

>>11840064
Bro there have been hundreds of theories of sensation since Kant came up with his, are you really just going to tell me that his is the only viable one and also the undisputablr only possible correct way of thinking about aesthesis?

>>11840064
Ideas don't abandon sensibility they're founded on it

>>11840074
Yes but for plato a triangle is supreme over the hopeless approximations found in experience which are entirely pointless and arbitrary. for plato the world has Down syndrome and a square is true bliss.

>>11840069
You're deflecting you coward. Entirely missing the point. See my response above.

>>11840090
I don’t get it, you just keep saying that Plato is wrong and Kant is right but you provide no reasons for us to believe that your argument is valid, let alone sound

>>11839609
>if people disagree they must all be wrong
this is your brain on insectoid eastern “””thought”””

>>11840101
>>11840090
y'all need buddha, god bless

>>11840027
This post is too fucking real

>>11840101
The swift and ruthless Kant felled mighty Plato in one deadly stroke. For all his merit Plato must be forsaken by all future philosophers. Anyone who denies this is, in Kant's terms, a light dove who longs for airless space, thinking her wings will serve her there uninhibited by the burdensome friction of sense. Do you not see? For Plato the world of sense is nothing more than an irksome obstruction, a gross distraction and an ugly degradation of the "true forms" which Plato hid himself in, to gaze for all eternity at pure concepts free from any perceptual correspondence. He turned himself from the immediate world of experience to the functions of his mind, which he figured were the basis for the "world below". In his world of true forms, there are no individuals, only pristine ideas, free of all force and reality; unmoving frozen forms that pointed long ago to real things in experience, but now for the sage they represent mere static, icy relations of things, without a will, without a heart, without motive or relationship or place. Belonging to no community, in and of themselves, isolated and pure, unfelt and unseen, known only through a cold dissection in reason's operating room. Kant resuscitated the world, brought it back to life as warmth returned to its limbs and gave it its identity, its substance, its vital force. Kant suppressed the tendency to regard the electricity of his own brain as the earth's executioner, to regard his own ideas as supreme and eternal, and kneeled to the unfathomable, which knighted him and placed him far above his peers and contemporaries as a true sayer and protector of the highest calling of man, which all the rationalists and theists usurped: FAITH.

>>11840164
Schopenhauer was a NIGGER

>>11840168
Schopenhauer embraced Plato's forms, you nigger. I condemn them.

>>11840179
You’re a fucking cocksucking goblin motherfucker
Stop
This is bullshit and we all know it you don’t even understand the concept of form
You’re probably the same retard from the Spinoza thread who never read Spinoza but thought that CUNY pasting nitczchr quotes counted as providing an argument about Spinoza that demonstrated your own knowledge of the subject
Guess what FAGGOT ahoy we’re erong THERE and you’re wrong HERE

>>11840193
I SALVAGE MAN'S HIGHEST PRIVILEGE: TO DIE, TO PERISH, TO ATTAIN THE FINAL END, BEYOND E'EN THE ENDLESS ABYSS, THAT TERRIBLE ETERNITY. I BESTOW UPON THEE THE HONOR OF EXTINCTION, OF DEATH, OF FREEDOM. ONLY A MORTAL CAN ATTAIN TO THE GREATEST HEROISM, THE GREATEST GLORY. I BRING YOU HOPE OF DELIVERANCE, OF REDEMPTION.

>>11840211
Satan?

>>11840212
GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN. THOU SHALT NOT MAKE A SCANDAL OF ME. I TEACH THE RECOGNITION OF THIS WORLD, AND THEREFORE THE HATRED OF IT. YE DENIERS OF THE WORLD CANNOT TRULY HATE IT. I TEACH THE PRIVILEGE OF EXTINCTION AND THEREFORE SHOW THE HIGHEST PATH IN LIFE. KNEEL. KNEEL BEFORE THE EARTH ELSE YE SHALL NE'ER OVERCOME IT.

Who here feels like both western and eastern ideologies have it all wrong?

>>11840263
Elaborate?

>>11840263
The Aztecs had it right the whole time.

>>11840221
Alas this is not the mouth for these ears. These pedants forgot the first commandment of philosophy: thou shalt not stop at the Neo-platonists, for thou shalt read up unto Kant, and thou shalt read Kant not once but thrice, so saith the decree, for thou must abandon icy rationalism for good and yet not fall into the opposite abyss of empiricism, and therefore thou shalt follow the critical path, for thou shalt not make philosophy into mysticism, and therefore shalt thou avoid the reckless phenomenalism of Hegel, false prophet and Antichrist for all time, and thy philosophy shalt remain transcendent in regards to idealism, and therefore shalt thou preserve a place in thy heart for faith, that true calling, that special reservation which alone teaches redemption from world-blindness, beastly or rational. Thus saith the Lord but these foolish infidels have made a mockery of the world, and turned it this way and that like a whore, like some base and lifeless thing. Ah! And therefore have they torn to pieces the true humanity and denied the place for faith, and therefore are they not knights but crippled beggars and self-worshippers, and heathens and myopics, the very blind bastards which Jesus healed, praise be to the Lord. The lovers of knowledge, the lovers of wisdom and books, the stuffy old haggards, the near-sighted, incapacitated puffers, forsaking unknowing faith for clouds and smoke. And so forth. Thus speak I of the will of the world, the heart and the moral field, whose faint and gentle touch alone leads man the way from icy eternity to a passion for Christ, that spirit which resonates through the ages and sings of deliverance, of bravery, and manhood.

>>11840310
Whom are you quoting?

all different cultures are like fingers on the hand of god

slightly different perspectives, but if we could integrate the strengths of all of them (at least in forming our own personal philosophies), that would be pretty cool.

>>11840311
I speak from pure heart O blind one. Which uncritical naysayers have forsaken in themselves and therefore their words are like pure ice, static floating abstractions, sharp and unfeeling and frigid, cold and heartless. I shiver at the thought. But behold life flows through my veins and therefore my words are warm and full of good faith, and recognition of thy sweet self; which I would vivify and whisper sweet tenders to, and nourish like a babe until thou hast grown to manhood when thou canst make thyself a soldier for Christ and true knight, chaste hero and blessed savior and redeemer of man. Alas fear not sweet child.

>>11840368
you really aren't impressing me
I suggest you take up street preaching
it would be less cringe than this

>>11840376
Aha! Behold, the woman in thee! You do not hear me because you do not listen with your manhood! Ha! Woman! Saith ye I must "impress" ye? Ha! Like a woman you wait for man, and then mock with uncritical retort and stubborn one! Behold, I speak not to thee, for thou hast but spoken to me like woman to man, and a man I am, standing firm on the earth, whilst thou sendeth thy retorts from the abyss, which grow fainter even as I speak.

>>11839602
Plato

>>11840472
Good heavens how did you get through Plato if you can't even read through this thread?

>>11839505

>>11840014
So many things wrong I can't l
tell if high quality bait. if so, well meme'd. Kant thinks "noumena" are absolutely and eternally real, and the substansial world is simply "phenomenal" interpretation (i.e. it's all in your mind bro) of the noumena for no reason at all. Kant completely turned philosophy into the onanistic trancendental idealism of the German Enlightenment. Kant is a Platonist and Trump is a Kantian

>>11840493
Show me a system from the east which equals Kant's. Show me a clear, lucid, profound critical idealism which explains the operation of the mind, from sensation to reason and to understanding, which ascends the summit of the mind and returns with the divine humility of a CRITIQUE.

>>11840516
You are stuttering and blabbering, woman. Be careful before you descend into hysterics. Show me once where Kant calls noumena absolute.

>>11840482
>Plato is Mongol
>Mongol are from the Steppe
>show me critical system from Steppe
>Plato
syllogism holds up my dude

>>11840535
Sweet babe, rest thy soft head upon my shoulder while I whispers gentle tenders into thine ear. O fair child, listen now to what I shall say, and reflect: Plato's system is not critical, you nigger.

>>11840534
experience is only appearance and appearance NEEDS a noumena just as Plato's sytem needs forms, that's precisely why the are both absolute. The also both lie totally outside of human comprehension. I take it you never made it past the wiki page, try the phil encyclopedias out next time (or read him)
>And we indeed, rightly considering objects of sense as mere appearances, confess thereby that they are based upon a thing in itself, though we know not this thing as it is in itself, but only know its appearances, viz., the way in which our senses are affected by this unknown something.

>>11840555
>Plato's system is not critical
t. sophist

>>11840566
Oh, is it so? Does it "NEED" noumena? Does it positively lust after it? Jesus, man, get ahold of yourself. Go ahead and BUTCHER the profound term "absolute" with your wanton and reckless knavery. Luckily thou art a dull knife and so thy wantonness does not threaten anything vital but I pray thee findeth the true faith and ceaseth this unholy speech and demeaning tone.

>>11840573
Plato goes straight to monism, and uncritically mandates that icy, lifeless forms are the meaning of everything and the real world is depressing butchery of these.

Read my post again: >>11840164

>>11840591
why are you talking like a rennisance fair harlot? what are you defining as absolute, because the entire basis of phenomenal reality seems pretty damn absolute to me.

>>11839502
>pseud
cringe

>>11840601
>Kant was an idealist b-but he wasn't a monist b-because there was noumena!
then Plato wasn't a monist because forms exist. your argument is weak and resists textual analysis
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674971769

>>11840027
13th post best post

>>11840633
>cringe
pseud

>>11840130
I wouldn't worry about it

>>11840615
Listen, then. I will explain it in common English so that your unrefined taste can detect my meaning. For all the monists, and monadists, and formalists, and rationalists, and theists, and Platonists, the world which sensation gives us is little more than a crude and miserable approximation to the pure, unchanging world of forms, and so the ceaselessly fluctuating real world is something to be discarded, because its movements do not matter and are going nowhere. A triangle I draw on paper is always a depressing abortion compared to the pure idea, which again signifies nothing but a relation, a construction of things. The world of experience is "fallen" from the mathematical realm of solids and shapes, and ideas which I ought to gaze at profoundly and sever all individuals from, because they are mere shifting shadows, soulless and needless, unhappily bound and tortured in ugliness and unholiness.

Kant on the other hand rejects all this and says, defiantly, that the world of sense points to something, to a life, a will, which moves and bears a community in its folds. It is not to be discarded like an exposed child, but on the contrary, its true nature is a mystery beyond us, and not a mere play of shadows.

>>11840662
>>11840633

>>11839470
>endless technobabble
>western """philosophy"""

>>11840697
>Kant on the other hand rejects all this and says, defiantly, that the world of sense points to something, to a life, a will, which moves and bears a community in its folds. It is not to be discarded like an exposed child, but on the contrary, its true nature is a mystery beyond us, and not a mere play of shadows
have you never read the nyth of the cave? the shadows pointed to something, so did the very light (i.e. the Good) that cast the shadows. neither Plato's nor Kant's trancendentals move, that's a total mischaracterizaton, in fact they need to be static in order to provide us with intelligibility. both Kant and Plato rejected naive idealism (ie. reality isn't real, can be thrown away) and instead say that reality provides some surplus knowledge which reason can reveal as pointing to something outside of our reality which relates to it's structure. if you would actually engage with the material, you would realize it is Kant that says categories are internal whereas Plato saw them as external. This means Platos shadows are more real (in the naive sense) than Kants apperances, whos structures may totally fool us (hence why morality must come from pure reason).

>>11840860
tl;dr

>>11840866
based

>>11840860
Indeed, Kant cannot be forgiven for lapsing into the realm of ideas of the pure reason, and for this I must forsake him. Schopenhauer rightly reprimanded Kant for this, and yet almost in the same breath would pronounce that Plato's forms, as the special unity of which all individuals are, again, mere phantoms and shadows. Indeed, the terrible violence committed by all these great men toward the individual cannot be forgiven, and must be eternally condemned. Only Mainlander hit the mark, when he said that the lonely wills of individuals in dynamic community with one another are exclusively real and all else, including every callous and transcendent idea from which even the sharpest minds often times cannot divert their eyes, for so difficult is it to discipline the mind's constant inclination toward unity, is a projection in the mind.

>>11839470
>>11839485
I love the first two. Thread should have ended there.

>>11840914
>pronounce that Plato's forms, as the special unity of which all individuals are, again, mere phantoms and shadows.
whoops, it should have read: would pronounce plato's forms as the special unity of all individuals, which are, again, designated mere phantoms and shadows.

>>11840534
>thinking within the confines of the western paradigm

>>11840534
You're basically asking for Abhidharma. See Vasubandhu's Abhidharmakosakarika. He brought Kant's Copernican revolution to Buddhism at millennium before Kant was around. If it's critique you're interested in, the very argument format on which Western critique is predicated was in fact pioneered at Buddhist universities (Viharas) in central Asia during late antiquity. See Beckwith's Warriors of the Cloisters for the fascinating history and how the recursive argument format was transmitted from Buddhist civilization through Islamic philosophy into Europe via convivencia and the 12th century renaissance.

But you probably won't look at any of this stuff because it's just way, way easier to maintain a Kantian eurocentric myopia.

>>11840409
this is some good shit right hurr

>>11840697
a yes, the primacy of consciousness to be considered as preceding in importance that of "material" reality, yes.

good ol Ken Wilber has a bit to say about this in Sex, Ecology and Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution. he is a dude worthy of checkin out.

>>11840914
kind sir, can you bring to mind a book that deftly demonstrates and stays true to the spirit of your arguments? asking for educational purposes

>>11841170
There's not a single book that stays true even to the authors own arguments. Why seek ye for knowledge tender babe when ye could discover a passion for Christ in your heart?

>>11841725
Believe you me kind stranger, the passion for Christ burns strong within the depths of mine bowels. However, I thirst for books with logical proofs, I network ideas with books as the puzzle pieces, and it makes the puzzle quite a bit easier to communicate. I seek to wed my brain with my heart, and hopefully the both with my penis as well god willingeth

>>11841725
>>11841802
got a book for ya

>>11841881
oh yah is that the book ur mom got for homeschoolin while she changed ur diapers with her cheeto fingers

Bumping

>>11839470
>Lmao, what if there was like, a MASSIVE fish lol!
Ok, interesting point Chuang-tsu.

>>11840027
Based and teapilled