/lit/ - Literature

>>12853754
I'm a warrior. :]

>>12853764
Same here brother ;}

>>12853764

>>12853764
>>12853768
>>12853777
don't lie tell the truth

>>12853764
>>12853768
You're both targets

>>12853754

That aphorism is attributed to Heraclitus, but it isn't included among the fragments. From what is it?

>tfw I know in my heart I shouldn't be anywhere

>>12853849
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynic_epistles

>>12853849
some neet probably

Reminder that Heraclitus understood the logos better than Plato did. Plato's logos is more a dry, straight form of logic, while with Heraclitus it includes what Plato would consider the illogical.

>>12853858

Ok, thanks.

>>12853858
I've never heard about these before.

Yeah that’s pretty good but I’ve heard better

https://youtu.be/kLMBrLeBMS8

>>12853864
Heraclitus accounts for logic not being static.

I'm one of the ten who should not be there

>>12853754
i'd be one of those 80 targets, just shitting my pants and hoping that the warrior brings me back.

>>12853841
And you shouldn't even be here

>>12853754
I'm the 1 who delivers real business value to the organization and succeeds in streamlining processes for major stakeholders.

>>12853864
Can you give some example, quote on this

I'm Parmenides.

>>12854193
Black people are so cringe.

>>12855250
Based, what books do you read to do this?

>>12854193
=N=I=G=G=E=R=P=O=E=T=I=C=S=

>>12855838

>>12855918
Have no idea who this is.

>>12855256
Socrates' interactions with Glaucon suggest it, and Socrates' criticism of the artists as well. Reason was the fixation for Socrates and consequently for Plato; they elevated reason to chief importance. This is not something the Greeks before them did. The allegory of the cave is not something the Greeks before them would have conceived. Heraclitus, meanwhile, refers to the logos, but the conclusions he arrives at are nothing like Plato's. Heraclitus does not arrive at the "forms," in fact he rejects the notion of the forms. How could a person reject the notion of the forms and still hold reason as chief importance? They couldn't. Reason MUST play a secondary role then.

>>12853754
Well definitely not in phalanx warfare.

>>12853841
And I don't even belong here :(

>>12853754
I am currently a target, but I am working my way towards becoming an actual fighter.

>>12853754
This 90% principle is literally true
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/participation-inequality/

>>12854193
>white people told black people to not read 300 years ago
lol

>>12854193
cringe

>>12856628
was heraclitus a phalangite?

>>12854193
always reactionary

>>12856059
False and dumb.
Socrates discusses the arts being a gift of the gods, he was taught by divine oracles, and many of his ideas are derived from myth and theological laws.
This is why you don't read Nietzsche, kids. He read chapter one of The Republic and made up a bunch of bullshit from there.

>>12854193
they only laugh because they don't feel threatened

>>12854193
I thought blacks were good are doing their little rhymes... why is the negro not rhyming, I love it when they do their rhymes, when they hoot and holler, but I cannot have just that, I must have my rhymes too!
Oh woe me, I demand that I am given the black experience, I wish to see a nigger rhyme, or my damned money back, MAKE IT RHYME FOR THE SAKE OF GODS GRACE, DAMMIT.

>>12855250
anon, stop, it hurts.

>>12856890
No such thing as being a "warrior", or "fighter"
you know what you can be? A target, or a dog, I take your honor, and I take your humanity, you take shots when I say, you load the rockets when I say, you fly the plane everywhere I say, dogs to the fodder, or you could be the shield for the dogs.

I could heem everyone in this thread.

>>12859244
Im 6'5 429 pounds (pure muscle I promise) and my penis is so hard and long that it accounts for 25 pounds of my weight

>>12859170
You didn't provide a single argument against anything said.

>>12853841
>Murder German children with firebombs because Jews told you to
>A hundred years later, your race is literally going extinct because Jews told you to
>The only civil rights triumph in the history of your chickenshit Empire happened because Hindus with Nazi machineguns made a bunch of your kids dig their own graves in Kashmir
>After your disgusting Jewish empire collapses, everyone in the world celebrates and praises Hitler as the beginning of your end

The irony of WWII is the funniest thing in the world to watch as an Indian. I'm going to get to watch every single scrap of British culture be ground into the dust and thrown to the wind. I'm going to get to watch every homosexual in London be hanged from construction cranes. I'm going to get to watch Jews get thrown out of their windows.

And you? You can do nothing. You had a chance. It was in 1932. Unfortunately your God-King Churchill owed a bunch of Jews some money, so instead, you get to live in Pakistan. PAKISTAN! The India of India! The country we make fun of for being even shittier than Mumbai!

>B-B-B-B-B-BUT AT LEAST WE DIED IN THE MILLIONS TO HELP COMMUNISTS STEAL HUU HUU

Yeah, that's how you're going to be remembered. Rubes who helped Joseph Stalin steal half of a continent, and then made excuses while their country was colonized by FUCKING PAKISTANIS!

Gaaaaahahahahahaha! Oh God it's so rich!

>>12859260
Based poopoo schizoid post!
Godspeed you! Onward is the end of the human race, and bad to the unconscious, onward to rock to rock, onward to gas and gas, onward to the nothingness, no longer will it be cell to cell, we will rid all of creation from viewing itself, we will rid the world of the original sin, YOU WILL WITNESS NOTHINGNESS, AND YOU WILL SMILE UPON ITS HOLY BIRTH!

>>12859253
>he elevated reason to chief importance
>the daemon
>NOT AN ARGUMENT
This is your brain on NEETchuh.
>>12858699

>>12859290
Heraclitus' logos and Plato's logos are not the same. This is not debatable, considering they arrive at wildly different conclusions about nature and the universe. Heraclitus rejects the forms, bottom line; "You cannot step into the same river twice" and all that jazz.

Like Nietzsche, I don't trust Plato. The moment we interface with him, he immediately comes across as if he has something to hide. So, I find it to be a far cleaner approach to look at how Heraclitus understood nature and the universe, and then juxtapose his conclusions against Plato's, and "reverse engineer" so to speak to find what Plato was really thinking.

>>12859313
>Heraclitus' logos and Plato's logos are not the same
Completely irrelevant to what I said
|"You cannot step into the same river twice"
Not opposed to the forms, and irrelevant to what I said.
>I don't trust Plato
Irrelevant. And irrelevant to what I said.
>he has something to hide.
MUH FEELINGS. Irrelevant.
>"reverse engineer"
Science is sentient. Irrelevant.

And you want to talk about arguments...

>>12854193
imagine being a nigger in 2019 shiieeet

>>12859336
Socrates did not understand the arts; his formulation of them being a gift of the gods means nothing to me. Everything else you said is borderline appeal to accomplishment, as if because he underwent certain procedures or claimed connections to certain things that this changes what he really thought and what he expressed in his philosophy.

>Not opposed to the forms, and irrelevant to what I said.
It is entirely opposed to the forms. You don't understand Heraclitus. The full passage is:

>You cannot step into the same river twice, because it is not the same river and you are not the same man.

Nature is expressed here as consisting of temporal relations eternally relating to other temporal relations. But that alone doesn't illustrate my point, you need to read his other fragments as well. Such as:

>The way up and the way down are one and the same.
>The logos of the soul is increasing itself.
>It is sickness that makes health pleasant and good; hunger, plenty; weariness, rest.
>Heraclitus attacked Hesiod for making some days good and other days bad, because he did not recognize that the nature of every day is one.

The universe that is painted in Heraclitus' fragments forbids the addition of anything like the forms. He does not categorize in that way; the universe is one, as in it is eternally pouring into itself, and he makes this point by showing us that opposites are not distinct but rather polarities, degrees, temporal relations inextricably tied to other temporal relations.

This shit is not in Socrates or Plato, but it is in many other places in the culture of the Hellenes. Heraclitus understood the Greek religion, what we call Greek mythology today, better than Socrates or Plato did; he understood the "thunderbolt that steers all things," the meaning of Zeus and the Olympians. They might as well have been atheists as far as the Greeks were concerned, and we even SEE other Greeks interpret them in this light in the text.

I suspect that Socrates didn't intend at all to be perceived as corrupting like he ended up being perceived as. What I suspect is that he and Plato misunderstood the Pre-Socratics. You do have fragments from Heraclitus such as:

>God is day and night, winter and summer, war and peace, surfeit and hunger; but he takes various shapes, just as fire, when it is mingled with spices, is named according to the savor of each.
>The waking have one common world, but the sleeping turn aside each into a world of his own.
>To God all things are fair and good and just, but men hold some things wrong and some right.

From a distance, you could argue that this is supporting the notion of the forms. However, that is a deep misunderstanding from an intellect that neglects to consider how the other fragments tie into these (or perhaps subconsciously avoids letting itself be informed by them). God (or Oneness) for Heraclitus is not anything like the forms at all, but a far more complex abstraction.

>>12853851
It's a potent feel.

>>12859442
>Socrates did not understand the arts
Stopped right there.

>>12859495
If you stopped at that, then it's for the best. You think like he did. Which means we have little to offer one another in a debate.

>>12859513
Again, irrelevant.
This is the problem with completely denying logic: there are no longer any rules of engagement. And so fools like you go off on a tangent without ever addressing the core argument, let alone approaching the essence of what is said.
You can prove me wrong by restating the point of disagreement I put forth.

>>12854193
>FUCK I LOOK LIKE????
a nigger

>>12859551
>completely denying logic
I never did that. Subordinating logic to a secondary or even tertiary role isn't a complete denial of it.

>You can prove me wrong by restating the point of disagreement I put forth.
Here's the thing, I already did and have nothing more to say. This is why I said we have nothing to offer each other. We will continuously appear as if we are talking past one another and it's because we do not share a single eye on the fundamentals of the universe. So this will be my last post to you.

>>12859587
Lol, can't even restate the problem, so instead talks about 'fundamental problems of the universe.'
Fucking pseud.

>>12854193
She was right about the mark twain shit, though