/lit/ - Literature

>>16006824
so what if someone believes that they have ultimate answers?
anyway, you start with the greeks, if you're a westerner, because it's the basis of your intellecutal heritage.
some familiarity with ancient egypt and the ancient near east is also not bad, since they influenced ancient greece.
obviously you're not supposed to unironically apply platonism/aristotelianism from 4th-3rd century BC to mostly anything; that would be retarded.

>>16006824
How do you understand metaphysics if you don't understand the most obv different forms of metaphysics? Parmenides leads to different ethics, math interpretations etc than heraclitus does or plato or Aristotle or stoic etc etc. Even better you get to see where and how they fail and wat they adapt when they do fail. The one stop shop of metaphysics is definitely in the greeks and that math, science, medicine, politics, law, logic, literature etc are formulated either initially or in good form by them first is another good reason to them being a good starting point.

>>16006881
>obviously you're not supposed to unironically apply platonism/aristotelianism from 4th-3rd century BC to mostly anything; that would be retarded.
Except thats what everyone does who "starts with le greeks". There are unironic Plato followers on /lit/ right now.

>>16006956
Yes well you'd be embarrassed to find that's exactly what mathematical platonists do who are the over majority of ppl in math today. Picrel absolutely not enough mileage

>>16006824
If you think start with the Greeks means read Plato first then you're retarded

>>16006974
>meme images as arguments
>only mentions Plato once in meme image anyways so barely applies to post
When did /lit/ become /pol/ tier?

>>16006824
If you got solely into reading with no ulterior motive in mind (such as being the next Hegel or Stirner shitposter) then The Greeks are a great place to start because they're the beginning of many such important genres of literature such as mythology/folklore, religion, and logic.

>>16006824
Just start with the Greeks

>>16007000
You clearly are the visitor. Gtfoh in that you can't even respond to great and given arguments by even Nobel prize winners of the first sort. My responses have been perfect to develop the conversations. You look like the troll and newfag here

>>16007018
I like how it's a phrase that always answers itself.

>>16007029
>Literal appeal to authority and a meme image
>"My responses have been perfect to develop the conversations."
Hah.

>>16006956
well... what can you do. no one is forcing anyone to be an unironic original platonism follower.

>>16007029
Your recourse to a meta point of view your necessity of viewing a reaction to your post as in need to be translated in to a metatheory, proves that you are not understanding this boards rules in am intuitive way and therefore that you arent a "member"
Tldr fuck off faggot

>>16007047
The reply was that it's a meme to start w the greeks and you become foolish to do so. I proved ppl have to make this choice anyways and that the metaphysics extends past the author and their applications. Any other questions refer to >>16006914

>>16007075
Yet you acknowledge my response was legitimately lit and not pol. Idc if lit is wiped out, any lit remade will still account for this as lit and this is wat makes irrealism bad.

>>16006824
Based. "Start with the Greeks" is memeshit. You should read things that are relevant to you. If that takes you to the Greeks, excellent. People who take this path usually do so because they have no direction, or purpose for their reading.

>>16007098
Shut up contie, your individualism leads you to sesame street

>>16007055
Personally I think they should just start with the Descartes and go from there. At least it might be semi-relevant. Anything but Plato/Aristotle.

>>16007077
>I proved ppl have to make this choice anyways
lol.

>>16006824
I didn't start with the Greeks and I wouldn't say I regret it but I think one does benefit from having such a foundaiton. I currently plan on reading some ancient Greek stuff later this year.

>>16006914
And i see no problem in that. The issue for me is mainly on the idea that someone should start AND end with the greeks.
>>16006974
I've read some entries on the ontological nature of mathematics and they mention that current realists positions argue for the metaphysical existence of mathematical entities but it's not meant to be confused with the actual doctrine of Plato (numbers being intermediaries between sensible reality and the unintilligible world. Mathematical entities are analogous to the Ideés but not the same as them). They mean "platonists" in the popular sense of the word.
>>16007018
I did. Because i love their culture and they introduced me to Sparta which is even better.

>>16007112
>t. aimless coper

>>16007124
Certainly end where you want and if we find a better example at metaphysics in chinese history or even in the next hit fantasy series then use that but greeks are greeks are greeks are greeks. You simply can't get around them.

Yes it's platonism not Platonism in that it is derivative of his points but not directly attested. After read Timaeus etc there's no other way to call it especially considering that's a huge basis of his metaphysics. Aristotelian and kantian math in that numbers are predicated off material things was destroyed by frege. The only thing frege didn't get to destroy was formalism but that can be overcome.

>>16007129
>gets called aimless, immediately calls aimless
Eat shit contie

>>16006974
Isn't there an exact replica of this image but with Christianity/God instead of philosophy?

>>16007124
In short you need these metaphysics to build off or refute them. There's no other fuller body of metaphysics to do this in.

>>16007166
I wouldn't be surprised but I don't have it. It'd be perfect too bad I don't have it

>>16006824
I propose doing what everyone else in this board did "start with wikipedia".

>>16007171
>>16007157
Honestly you guys have motivated me to read more of the greeks although to be honest what i was more caucious about was the ethical/political implicacions of their work and their cultural origins which i admit, it was rather dumb of my part to expect too much from it.

>>16006824
>anachronical
I see what you're doing you fucking sophomore. Learn some Greek that wasn't invented in the Enlightenment.

>>16007246
I say this for all philosophy, and as a particular riposte to School of Life, the conclusions are almost never important. It's the framework they use to arrive at it so Kant developing a method to assert there is objective morality is more important than him applying it with 'don't lie'. There is a necessary morality all humans are after and it's important to build off that. Many ppl focus on derivative conclusions and end up in relative nihilism because they continually stick their head in their ass.

>>16007246
Actually their political and culture thoughts are their best works. It's the logic, metaphysics, and argumentation that is the thing you have to be careful of. Plato especially had a cult following that has turned him into a religion. Imagine all the cope and bad faith arguments of Christians, but also under the protective wing of academics.

>>16007268
No one has mentioned /pol/itai and i was being a smart ass with that one

>>16007190
Start and never end kek

>>16007276
You might find it odd that Plato's republic can never be reproduced by analysis and by practical example. You would know this if you read him.

>>16007297
Prime example.

Naturally if you want to get into something, a good place to start is the beginning and so since the Greeks (Plato, Aristotle, etc) are typically recognized as where Western Philosophy begins to take shape, that's a fairly natural place to start. Where would you recommend a starting point instead?
I also think the meme is very often confused with "enjoy the greeks". Just because you start there doesn't mean that you have to end there, or that you have to stay there very long. I think starting with the greeks and thinking they have "no relevance to our contemporary world" is just as important as starting with the greeks and thinking that Plato has a big dong.
Perhaps you could make an argument that similar to how you don't need to study the American Revolution to become a Civil War historian, you don't need to study the Greeks to study some particular philosophical branch. But even if you are a Civil War historian, you probably have some appreciation for different time periods. Or if you consider how Calculus is taught, usually you start with learning what a limit is and then using this formula as h -> 0 to calculate it. And then you learn the "shortcuts" and that the derivative of x^n is nx^(n-1). You may think that you could have just started with the derivative rules and skipped the first part, but it's considered important both as intellectual development as well as for justification why the rules exist.
So tl;dr start with the greeks

>>16007270
>>16007276
Thanks all of this helps a lot.

You're essentially completely right. But philosophers that do matter to us use references to ancient greeks as sort of an auxiliary language between themselves. You can explain a high level concept by starting with "it's kind of like plato's Ideals but..." and everyone will know what you're talking about.
Also they're important to understand a lot of medieval christian/muslim/jewish philosophy if you're into that, especially christian.

Anyone who disagrees with your fundamental attitude is a fag. There is nothing mind-blowing in any of the socratic dialogues.

But where should you end with the Greeks?Is there a general consensus or it depends on what type of philosophy you want to read next?

>>16006881
Applying pure platonism to anything is based

>>16008968
Just get a feel for metaphysics, preferably read a bit of plato and Aristotle then read parmenides/heraclitus. You should get a good feel wat you enjoy and can either pick to go into stoicism/epicureanism (based on ur preferences) or read a history of philosophy and decide whether to dive into enlightenment or german idealism. After that dive you can read another history of philosophy then go into contemporary. I highly recommend analytic but take continental if you're enraptured by them for whatever reason. Then you can either go deeper into greeks or other parts or you can start applying your metaphysics in other fields. I would start w logic because there's probably a logic already made that aligns w your beliefs then you can develop your own math off of that.

>>16006824
Start with the Americans

>>16007285
I didn't need to read that far, you fish handler.

why do newfags bump this thread

>>16008995
Thanks. I've read quite a bit o Plato already but what would you recommend for Aristotle? Maybe the physics and select parts of the metaphysics?
My goal right now is to get a good foundation for Heidegger but i've still got a long way to go so that might change.

>>16009043
Yeah just his metaphysics, physics (don't read conclusions literally, it's one of my favorite books actually), Nichomacean ethics if you don't have a good idea wat it's about. Politics is kinda interesting if you're into but not super informative. You can skip his logic. It's not super important until you engage w more than just categorical logic. Frege used categorical logic by Aristotle and leibniz's propositional logic and mixed them to make predicate logic. So it's important at some point. Idk a good secondary on Aristotle but a history of philosophy will cover the rest just fine. If you get enough out of Nichomacean ethics you can really skip past his other books besides his 4 causes. It's a direct ancestor of 4 elements of presocratics and heraclitus particularly has a way of explaining their relationship to each other and if you're into pluralism at all then you're going to want to see that but even if not it's good to know how to break an object apart into 4 interpretations.

Bump