/lit/ - Literature

>>13383333
nice quads

because muh empirism

Page 10 bump.

>>13383333
cuz Aristotle is the father of pseuds, literaly everything he wrote was wrong

>>13384787
that's why he dead

>>13384787
this

>>13383333
Because they need to cite someone credible to reference so that their autistic fans take them seriously.

>>13383333
>Stefan Molyneux
said that Plato was the founder of communism
e-celebs must die

>>13384838
he's not entirely wrong

Ayn Rand was not a pseud though. Aristotle, John Locke and her are the 3 most important philosophers to ever live.

>>13384838
Plato was the founder of a shitload of ideas (many of which contradict each other) and some entire fields of philosophy.

It's you who are in the wrong here. It's you who must die. I bet you've never actually read any of the dialogues.

>>13384899
By the way, being the founder doesn't mean he accepted the idea.

We simply don't know what the heck Plato believed in.

>>13384908
Just to complement: I am not saying he founded communism. I'd have to reread the Republic in order to know that.

But it doesn't seem to me to be an impossible interpretation, it really depends on how far you're willing to stretch the definition of communism.

Plato is usually seen as one of the founders of innatism, for instance, but his theory of innate ideas has little to do with contemporary genetics, universal grammar and whatnot. However, he is their predecessor and even Chomsky cites him often.

>>13384899
stop lurking /lit/ Molyneux

>>13384925
Go read a book.

Molyneux isn't any worse than Slavoj "Beethoven's 9th symphony has a carnival march in it" Zizek and other idiots neo-/lit/ idolizes.

>>13383333
You forgot the biggest Aristotelian psued of them all, OP

>>13383333
Quads of Truth. Praise be to John Galt

>>13386292

This but unironically.

>>13384921
>Muh everything is communism

>>13384921
if you accept the low IQ luke warm take that "communism means gubmint do stuff XD" then sure you can say that the republic that is described by Plato in The Republic would be called communist by molydrones today
I bet they'd at least have a better healthcare system though

>>13383333
Well I take exception to your implication that top lass was a pseud but literally every philosopher that has ever existed and likely ever will exist is inconsequential compared to Aristotle himself. The enlightment called him THE philosophe for a reason. Pseuds and the wise alike have no choice but to return at root to Aristotle.

>>13384953
No, he's much worse. I take it you don't read books about Hegel, given that you didn't know this already? It's fine, not everyone can glide aloft the heights of intellect: you are like the downs to my uppers.

>>13384856
>Ayn Rand was not a pseud

>>13386898
Developed, robust, and integrated her system was. She identified new logical fallacies that were, unbeknownst to the people committing them, at the heart of countless precedi g philosphies (fallacy of; stolen concept, floating abstraction, frozen abstraction ect).
Point out the pseudery Tom.

>>13384856

>>13384856
What about Bacon "in your definition"

>>13386937
Good work on induction, better refered to as a philosopher of science.

>>13386917
>Point out the pseudery Tom.
Writing a dreadful 1000 page novel to proselytise your philosophy because you know writing non fiction would expose your weak ideas is about as pseud as it gets. L Ron Hubbard tier.
Not only was Rand a pseud, but you are too. You don't really know about?philosophy (otherwise you wouldn't make the claims about Rand that you do), but are trying to appear as if you do, textbook pseud

>>13383333
Aaarrgh, ultra giga nigga has been defeated

>>13386982
>L Ron Hubbard tier
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5YWTFW5WMw
You were -given- your opinion on rand.
>Writing a dreadful 1000 page novel to proselytise your philosophy because you know writing non fiction
She DID write nonfiction dumbass. You fags still haven't gotten over the asshurt of the potency of John Galt's speech have you? Which is why you harp on about her fiction, as if it were the most relevant thing about her.
>You don't really know about?philosophy (otherwise you wouldn't make the claims about Rand that you do), but are trying to appear as if you do, textbook pseud
>Rand is bad, therefore saying she is pseud
Real robust logic there cat.

>>13386292
>>13386323
What's wrong with Saint Aquinas or Thomism?

>>13387020
Whoops
*>Rand is bad, therefore saying she is good is pseud

>>13386982
Ayn Rand wrote more non-fiction than fiction. She was a shit tier writer, but she wrote novels because that's what she wanted to do in life, you mong

>>13384787
thirded

>>13386292
>>13386323
I hesitate to criticize anyone who played such a major role in the life of the Church, but in my humble opinion you are both correct.