/lit/ - Literature

>>18342331
Plato is smarter than every single philosopher from after 1400, and I'm not joking.

How is he wrong?

>>18342331
is it fun to post vulgar misrepresentations of philosophers on 4chan? do you enjoy yourself?

Are you asking if Plato is as dumb as a straw-man that is so absurd it mischaracterises his thought?

>>18342331
The soul in its pure state is at one with God and the world of forms. That is why Plato thinks it would have all knowledge ever and that learning is only retrieving what you already know.

>>18342331
The theory of recollection is the general filterer before you understand Plato, it separates the wheat from the chaff because no matter if one takes it literally or not, if you can't appreciate it then you don't understand him, and high philosophy is protected from the peasant classes.

>>18342337
>This slave understands mathematics when I ask the right questions, it's the proof that we don't learn anything and that we just remember our state before birth!
is this the absolute state of greek philosophy?

>>18342402
above all, don't explain anything

>>18342408
Truths of the universe (mathematics) have been truths for eternity.

>>18342408
If the soul is in the world of forms then it has all knowledge by definition. When you learn something in this life you are remembering something you had awareness of already in the world of forms.

>>18342423
not the point of the argument

>>18342425
>if my theory, which implies that we know everything before birth, is true, then we all know everything before our birth
nice circular argument
but this is not what platon says
his argument in favor of amnanesis is that a slave can understand mathematics when he is asked the right questions

socrates was worse
>do you agree with (gross oversimplification)
>"uh, yeah"
>AH HAH. now im going to apply to to specific scenario

>>18342335
who are the smartest philosophers of 1000-1400

>the world of the forms
Stop taking his spatial metaphors literally.

>>18342598
For all intents and purposes they are the same person. The only Platonic writings to not include Socrates are the Laws and the Seventh Letter.

>>18342337
feral humans.

>>18342331
>haha wtf plato has different opinions to mine
You're the dumb one OP. Try and disprove the theory of anamnesis. Whether you believe it or not is irrelevant.

>>18342632
feral humans

>>18342619
Feral humans never had the opportunities to relearn, as provided to meno by Socrates. I believe that there was even a feral child who learned language once she was recivilised

>>18342637
>>18342638
>>18342619
>>18342638
>I'll just keep repeating this genius piece of wisdom

>>18342632
>Try and disprove the theory of anamnesis.
Retard
Try and disprove psychanalysis

>>18342638
I mean meno's slave by the way

>>18342637
Mentally handicapped and down syndrome people might be a better example.

>>18342643
The point is that it's easy to think plato was ridiculous but when you think about it for just one minute, you realise that the theory deserves respect. OP is overlooking the entire Greek tradition, I.e. the metaphysics, the epistemology. I dont even like plato, but I dont feel the need to elevate myself above him intellectually, simply because I live in the modern world

>>18342642
feral humans

>>18342648
Missing the point though. Its hard to logically disprove anamnesis. Plato founded his theories on reason, listing scientifically founded phenomena to disprove it is easy but plato likely did not have access to the same observations. Downies would have died very quickly in greek times for example.

>>18342666
You are a feral human.

>>18342437
>not the point of the argument
Yes it is, you didn't understand Plato's argument. You're a retard who thinks contingent memories are equivalent to real memories. You fundamentally do not understand Plato. Hylics should not be allowed to comment on Plato.

>>18342648
>>18342643
People love dropping one-bombs here. Would have liked to discuss this but clearly you prefer to think you have btfo me. I wasnt even trying to argue for anamnesis; just arguing the case that OP is a retard

>>18342687
>hylics
115 iq cope

>>18342331
Forms aren't even that tough to understand. Objects aren't recognized except by the concept (form). A chair, for example, has to hypothetically be something you can sit on. The form of a chair involves sitting on it, even if it rams a dildo up your ass, or if it's a stool, or if it has a back, or arms. There's a greater form of what a chair is that all chairs follow, despite their various differences.

>>18342694
feral humans.

>>18342701
Yh I wish I read the full straw man pic in your shite OP before posting. It would've helped me realise you're either a tremendous brainbleeding faggot or a troll, likely the first. Suck my big willy
:^)

>>18342709
>implying I am OP
are you a feral human

>>18342696
Contingent memory contains memories that are shadows of real memory, they are imitations which contain nothing but arbitrary facts which are entirely contingent upon circumstances, and thus cannot be obtained except through artificial construction (experience/experimentation). These are considered 'good' by people to the extent that they will generally be reapplicable to experience, but they are of course never wholly true, because they are contingent and subject to no longer being applicable (in other words, they are dream memories). Real memory is unconditionally true at all times, as in the example he gives of the slave recalling a geometric truth. It is impossible to arbitrarily invent these memories, because they are permanent and only discoverable through the pure forms of intellection. All other memories, the contingent types, are mere attempts to approximate real memory.

>>18342722
don't care, didn't read plus you are a gnostic

>>18342637
they are just monkeys, karl

>>18342732
lmfao

>>18342732
>didn't read plus you are a gnostic
I am a psychic, you are a hylic.

>>18342699
Now try to imagine "sitting" with no objects.

>>18342331
>Plato's theories are wrong because they can't be proven with the scientific method

>>18342901
nice selfie

>>18342897
It's a good job Plato doesn't ask you to do that then.

>>18342924
>objects aren't recognized except by their concept
>the concept itself requires the object to have meaning
there, I explained it for you.

>>18342699
i can sit on a boulder, on the ground, off a cliff, what the fuck are you saying

Unfortunately true

>>18342605
>1000-1400
>BC
Certainly not you.

>>18343503
CE***

>>18342335
aquinas btfo

>>18342423
The fact that mathematics is internally consistent doesn't make it true.

>>18342687

>>18342331
You should give him a break, it was 2000 years ago and the just of the idea is the base of our scientific knowledge. We assume that whatever state we perceive things in, there’s a higher unchanging law that governs them. A can come up with experiments to calculate G or the reduced plank constant because I assume they don’t change. I can create cars and planes and medicine because I assume the laws governing their function don’t change. It’s been a good assumption so far. I’d guess that 80% of what is good in this world comes from our search for “truth”, a lot of what is bad comes from straying from that path or truth’s obfuscation.
Veritas is the human motto and it originates in Plato’s ideas

>>18342408
You didn't understand Plato. There are truths we know without learning. This is the important fact he realized. Anamnesis is an explanation of this fact, absolutey based for the time being. It's brilliant. You are not.

>>18342331
Let me guess, you're an atheist?

Plato is honestly like a reverse pleb filter. Anyone who seriously considers his retarded ideas has thereby revealed themselves as unintelligent.

OP shits his pants on a regular basis. I know it as a fact.

>>18343982
Filtered

>>18342331
Fuck I don't even agree with Plato but the level of retardation of anti-Platonists in this thread deserves to be ridiculed for centuries to come

>>18343548
> the universe runs on math
What more do you need to acknowledge the truth of mathematics?

>>18342937
It's not the first time this has been pointed out
>According to Diogenes Laertius, when Plato gave the definition of man as "featherless bipeds," Diogenes plucked a chicken and brought it into Plato's Academy, saying, "Behold! I've brought you a man," and so the Plato added "with broad flat nails" to the definition

>>18342331
I had a good argument for anamnesis but I forgot. Your soul knows what I'm talking about though.

>>18342331
Plato is what you get when you reach the most intelligent conclusion possible without having any knowledge of DNA or extensive information of neuroscience.

>>18344274
If the universe runs on math how come mathematicians are so powerless?

>>18344713
Mathematicians, as in people who master mathematics, make bucks on crypto and finance as we speak.

>>18344746
Allegedly.

>>18342699
That’s what we call a “concept.” The hallmark of Platonism is that it posits that concepts have real, supersensory existence and that the existence of material objects is dependent on them. By contrast, most people today would believe that concepts exist only in the mind are generally acquired through abstraction.

>>18344755
https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/01/26/snarks.html
Here's an article from Vitalik Buterin.

https://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-businessmen/business-executives/vitalik-buterin-net-worth/

Here is his net worth.

>>18342417
It literally explains how is a priori knowledge possible in an ever-changing world.

>>18344983
>a priori knowledge
Cope

>>18342331
The forms were read into Plato by retarded Neo-platonists, read Plato again and you will be freed from this misunderstanding.

>>18344763
and that is what it all means: abstraction. ab + traho: draw away. exactly what the forms are: within objects.

>>18342331
Think about a triangle. No one ever saw a triangle. It doesn't exist in the real world. Yet when you see some bunch of ink on a paper, or any bunch of matter, you can tell wether it looks like a triangle or not. You can assign triangleness to it, in spite of the fact triangleness doesn't exist in the material reality of things. Triangleness preexists both your mind and any attempt to draw a triangle. That's a form. Squareness or elephantness or goodness are other forms. They are eternal, do not depend on the world, and yet the world shape according them.

PEOPLE WHO REJECT THE FORMS CONFUSE THE NATURAL (ONTOLOGICAL) ORDER WITH RATIONAL ORDER. THE FORMER IS THE MOVEMENT OF PROODOS, THE LATTER OF EPISTROPHE. READ BOOKS ILLITERATE RETARDS.

>>18342331
Anamnesis immediately made complete sense to me. Am I a brainlet?

>>18345139
you're probably young and easily influenced

>>18345122
That's just a shape which has something in common with other shapes, which you then generalize as triangleness.
>They are eternal, do not depend on the world, and yet the world shape according them.
Without the shapes from which you have generalized triangleness, there wouldn't be any triangleness. If you imagine a triangle you conjure up a shape possesing triangleness.

>>18345138
Put your trip back on.

>>18345187
you are an irredeemable brainlet, sorry

>>18342408
Not that Plato is correct, but you should try reading more than one dialogue. The phaedo also has an argument for recollection that is not as dumb, though you will probably reject it as well

>>18343982
And you must be more insightful than Plato.

>>18342598
Plato used Socrates as the mouth piece for all of his philosophy. Its like Christians thinking "What would Jesus do?". Plato thought "What would Socrates say/ think?" whenever he was considering philosophy. As another anon said, they may as well be the same person.

>>18345122
The only person I've seen in this thread be able to reproduce the theory of forms and recollection accurately.

>>18345206
Plato was not insightful at all. He was a full on retard. The only reason him and Aristotle became popular is because their retarded teachings were useful to the people in power.

>>18345167
Are you an anti-platonist?

>>18345200
I'm not the one who thinks the "world shapes according to triangleness", which is a preposterous. If the world hadn't already shaped you would have nothing to generalize.

>>18345216
>The only reason him and Aristotle became popular is because their retarded teachings were useful to the people in power.
Cope harder

>>18345206
>The only person I've seen in this thread be able to reproduce the theory of forms and recollection accurately.
He don't talk about anamnesis

>>18345229
>read this stupid book by stupid author called stupid retard's revenge
no thanks. I actually study biology and there's no Aristotle in the curriculum.

>>18345241
Stemtards are such bugmen

>>18345216
What are you trying to imply here? Don't you think the philosophical foundation they laid down for the west was at all important? Are you also ignoring their contribution to ethics and metaphysics?
Who do you constitute as an insightful thinker, it doesn't have to just be a philosopher.

>>18345241
>I actually study biology and there's no Aristotle in the curriculum.
Retard

>>18345241
Your interest in biology should have lead you to an appreciation of Aristotle. Why are you here?

>>18345249
> Don't you think the philosophical foundation they laid down for the west was at all important?
Influencial? Yes. Valuable, no.
>Are you also ignoring their contribution to ethics and metaphysics?
Both worthless subjects.
>Who do you constitute as an insightful thinker, it doesn't have to just be a philosopher.
Nietzsche is a famous one.

>>18345241
>I actually study biology and there's no Aristotle in the curriculum.
There is teleology everywhere retard

>>18345262
>Nietzsche
Oh no.

Also, I will add that if you simply evaluate Platonic dogmas in themselves and not Platonic arguments, you are retarded and totally missing the point of the dialogue form. Plato wasn't stupid, there's a reason he wrote dramatic arguments and not simple explications of his beliefs. He is trying to force you to philosophize- even your disagreements should force you to do this. By refusing to engage with the argument and just evaluating the conclusion for some dumb meme about how intuitively wacky it sounds, you are missing the entire point

>>18342643
This anon, for example, is irredeemably retarded. There are several locations where Plato tries to prove the Forms, and you can engage with his arguments directly, with logic, which is how we prove things.

I have almost no background knowledge here but subjectively feel like there could be truth to what he is saying, based on my own experience living and learning in the world.

>>18345139
You just have good memory.

>>18345246
>>18345250
You are both angry little creatures full of spite. There is no reason for me to reply seriously to you.
>>18345256
I have been on 4chan since 2007.
>>18345265
No. We are not encouraged to write teleologically. It's just a way to speak colloquially about it.

>>18345275
Yes. Plato's approach to logic is quite subtle at the beginning but once you really dive into his works it begins to really shine, good point.

>>18345227
read >>18345138
you can't even understand what you are talking about

>>18345283
>There is no reason for me to reply seriously to you
I'm not either one of these anons but you cited Nietzsche as a more valuable philosopher than Aristotle, that in itself deserves you to be taken as no more than a clown.

>>18345310
> that in itself deserves you to be taken
Learn to speak English.

>>18345320
English is my fourth language and I understand it better than you.

>>18342331
Is complicated to describe plato from his take on reality Aristoteles was less will and idea and more fire burns me because it has tiny spikes in it.

>>18345332
>English is my fourth language
It shows.

>>18345122

You are talking about logic. Logic isn't external. Logic is a cognitive process that begins with observation. Logic begins with observation. You being amazed that you discovered logic isn't the same thing as logic being "external"- that is just you being amazed at yourself.

Platonism is just just narcissism for idiots. People impressed with themselves for thinking abstractly. Monkeys learning how to count and bragging to everyone about how mystical it is. That's it.

>>18345229
Is the same retard who is still an unironic thomist in the year of our lord 2021?

>>18345283
>you are full of spite
>that is why i am on 4chan since 2007 and must engage in threads with subjects i understand nothing and have never read about and call everyone dumb

>>18345360
>subjects i understand nothing and have never read abouT
Learn English, Zoomer.

If you’re a hylic... wait until you recognize paranormal phenomenons, wait until you recognize the immaterial so that Plato becomes easier to understand.

The dialogues provide different information to the magi and a separate flavour of information to the materialistic scholar.

>>18345348
Of course it would. Your poor understanding of philosophy also shows and is a far greater embarrassment to yourself than a small spelling mistake. You try to talk so proudly but all that flies your mouth is nonsense!

>>18345380
there is literally nothing wrong with that sentence you retard

>>18345187
>>18345357
If forms emerged from the human brain, we'd expect mathematic truths to differ according to culture. They don't. Mathematical truths are true everywhere in the universe. In every part of the world drawing approximately a 3 4 5 triangle gives a right approximately a right angle, because everywhere, or nowhere since it doesn't belong to this world, the Pythagorean is true. It would be true for aliens on distant planets if they exist. It was true when no human brain, no living creature existed on earth.
This proves mathematical truths exist independantely of the human brain in a non material, eternal plane.

>>18345122
>Triangleness preexists both your mind
This is where Plato and I part ways.

>>18345450
Why?

>>18345418
>If forms emerged from the human brain
?
You see two shapes that have something in common(3 sides) and then you say every other shape that shares this commonality belongs to the same category. All you are doing is categorizing shapes based on a criterium you invented.
>in a non material, eternal plane.
This is gobbledegook. What is non material except the subjective?

>>18345450
I myself Platonic theory quite convincing - but I am not convinced yet.
I would like to hear other viewpoints that directly challenge him.

>>18345418
>If forms emerged from the human brain, we'd expect mathematic truths to differ according to culture.
No because human brains work the same

>>18345488
So you think reality is a by-product of the human brain?

>>18345512
Our apperception of it certainly is.

>>18345122
You fags need to read Wittgenstein and Sellars if you unironically believe that shit

>>18345525
And under this line of thinking there must be a true reality that we can't comprehend with our brains, is this what you think?

>>18345470
>?
>You see two shapes that have something in common(3 sides) and then you say every other shape that shares this commonality belongs to the same category. All you are doing is categorizing shapes based on a criterium you invented.
No for the good reason that no triangle exists. Think about a line, an infinite line, a line inifinite on both ends. Physically it has no sense whatsoever. Yet we can make objective assumptions about it, like theorems related to parallel lines. All mathematics are built on objects that have no physical existence.
>This is gobbledegook. What is non material except the subjective?
The ideal world precisely.
>No because human brains work the same
The Pythagorean theorem or any mathematical result does not depend on the human brain, it was there before any human being thought about it. It's in the nature of a 3 4 5 triangle to produce a right angle. If we all die tomorrow, this would still be true.

>>18345470
>What is non material except the subjective?
Real but abstract objects and God

>>18345546
Geometry, like the Pythagorean theorem, does not exist in the world, but is rather part of the a priori necessary structure of subjective experience. You are confusing the conditions of access to reality with objects in reality itself.

>>18345545
Not quite, since reality is something that is only when it is percieved since the statement "reality is" implies that a being has perceived it we cannot say that there is a reality that we cannot comprehend, for comprehension and reality are the same thing.

>>18345586
this is very platonic, you know it, right?

>>18345569
>a priori structure
>access to reality
you are more of a platonist than you might think

>>18345605
Insofar that Kant was a Platonist I suppose.

>>18345456
One reason is that I don't believe in universals.
>>18345471
The best criticism of Plato to this day remains Plato. In his dialogue Parmenides, the titular character Parmenides takes apart the theory of forms as Socrates desperately tries to defend it. These criticisms are also the reasons Aristotle points to as to why he rejected his teachers theory.

>>18345596
Is it? Maybe I need stop being a lazy ass bitch and read something other than the Apology of socrates.

Anamnesis = a priori
Forms = categories

anyone who shits on Plato but not Kant is genuinely stupid

>>18345586
I just started reading Plotinus and your post reads like it came straight out of the Enneads.

>>18345241
>biology
I am not surprised that someone studying biology doesn't understand basic philosophy
Go back to your precious Baconian method and stay there, there is nothing in philosophy for you, as you will never be able to engage with it properly.

>>18345681
Probably because of my bad choice of words, I'm a perspectivist, but admittedly a naive one.

>>18345546
>No for the good reason that no triangle exists.
This is a bit pedantic, but the image in this post
>>18345122
clearly depicts a shape which you can recognize as having 3 sides.
>Yet we can make objective assumptions about it, like theorems related to parallel lines. All mathematics are built on objects that have no physical existence.
Yeah, it's tautological. The "truths" are given by the definitions you use.
>The ideal world precisely.
Are you talking about the "world" of math you just mentioned? These are just ideas you have. Because of conventions, there are many people who have ideas that are pratically identical to your ideas, but they've all built them from the ground up. None of them have remembered them from any magical realm.
>It's in the nature of a 3 4 5 triangle to produce a right angle
Yeah, as I said, it's tautological. If anyone ever sets up the same defintions, they're going to come to the same "truth".

>>18345684
I don't care, I didn't ask.

>>18345684
>Baconian method
Anglo propaganda, the scientific method was invented by Galilei.

>>18345397
larper

plato is gay

>>18345241
First column.

>>18345908
I did read Phaedrus. It was awful.

>>18342331
Literally who

>>18345122
Can't this simply be acquired through abstraction? I see a bunch of triangle-like stuff, I see that they have similar shapes, my creative mind allows me to abstract them into a representation, a series of lines that we call a triangle. In this case, the concept of a triangle would ultimately be derived by experience, not known a priori.

>>18345713
>Are you talking about the "world" of math you just mentioned? These are just ideas you have.
Not him but the world of math can't be just something in your head as it constrains reality, limiting and defining what can exist at all.

>>18345947
I will indulge your gobbledygook. How does math "constrain reality"?

>>18345262
>Nietzsche
>Insightful
Pseud detected

>>18345959
Reality is the way it is because of math and other "abstract" concepts. If math or logic behaved differently, reality would be different. A reality without the concept of the number 2 would be just the monad and nothing else for example.

>>18345927
random Greek wrestler and political advisor, got famous for writing fanfic about his teacher

>>18346102
This is non fiction with maybe little fiction

>>18346083
How can you say that math isn't simply a model?

>>18346083
>Reality is the way it is because of math and other "abstract" concepts.
This is a repetition of what you said.
>If math or logic behaved differently, reality would be different.
This is insanity.
>A reality without the concept of the number 2
More insanity.

>>18342745
>I am a psychic, you are a hylic.

>>18345908
How can people read so many fucking books in four years... damn, am I that much of a brainlet

>>18346619
They mostly read excerpts.

>>18346112
For anyone who wants to know more about that:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mathphil-indis/
https://www.maths.ed.ac.uk/~v1ranick/papers/wigner.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujvS2K06dg4
Stolen from this recent thread: reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/nniakf

>>18342408
plato included that so people like you could understand what he was talking about. but evidently, in your case he should have included an even more simplistic explanation.

>>18346832
>there is no largest prime number that means there are little gluons and quarks insides of electorns that are actually mathematical equations
Mathematical phyiscs as a dicipline is unadulterated lunacy. These people simply do not exist in the real world any longer.

>>18346619
A ton of those are essays or would only be read in excerpts (Aquinas' Summa). You could read most of that list in reasonably short time.

>>18345947
>the world of math can't be just something in your head as it constrains reality
Why can't "your head" i.e. your brain constrain reality?

bump

>>18342331
Didn't Plato destroyed his own theory in his dialogue Parmenides though?

>>18348487
What did he replace it with? I thought Parmenides was about cosmology

>>18345942
That is what Aristotle though too, that forms do not pre-exist anything, but are abstracted from the multitudes of everything existing by your own mind.
It is complicated, because specific categories are indeed hard-wired into our minds, as are mathematics and logic, and you can't "empirically" find, much less abstract them.
Like, go find a √(−1) or an ∞ in empirical nature to abstract them from. You can't, yet they are real so long as we mentally perceive them, even manipulate them to discover other mathematics.

So far Plato is right, and OP is a retard.

>>18350256
>It is complicated, because specific categories are indeed hard-wired into our minds, as are mathematics and logic, and you can't "empirically" find, much less abstract them.
Abstraction is required for both logic and math.

>>18342335
So wrong.

>>18342331
Here from /fit/ and I respect Plato only because is apparently so fucking RIPPED and those thots are based.

>>18342331

Keep in mind that you're judging Plato by today's standards. For his time, he was the one of the greatest philosophers.He didn't have much to work with like other philosophers in the last 300-400 years.

>>18342338
Seconded
Some things r really confusing when it comes to how its phrased but not all of his stuff is like this. Op takes a small part and paints him as an idiot.
Still funny thread tho i like it and im a greek myself

>>18345823
I'm going to rim you

>>18342338
It's not a vulgar misrepresentation. Having read the Platonic canon, you have to understand that it is only mildly more serious than voodoo.

Plato is still a man of his time; he still believes that dreams are messages from the gods, that near death experiences are credible witness testimony of the afterlife, and so his arguments that objects have "suchness" are part of the same investigative impulse that gave us alchemy, astrology, divination and ceremonial magic. The idea of metaphysics continues to make people believe that the destiny of the world is controlled by the power inherent in symbols rather than the laws of physics.

Overall, Plato has stifled the human intellect in ways that are subtle and gross. He together with his student Aristotle, have only been useful by making what seems like every possible mistake at the outset. So you can appeal to their authority as great dunces whenever people make the same mistakes.

>>18351524
Bite me you historical philistine

>there are actual nominalists ITT

>>18351524
How come someone like Wittgenstein attracts so many braindead followers?

>>18351524
I fucking love science too

>>18342598
Retard.

>>18353254
"scientism" is the worst fucking meme buzzword to get popularized recently
It's not an argument, it's not an end-all refutation you can pull to defend unreasonable beliefs

>>18353836
It is, because behind the facade of science being a force of its own, there is nothing.

>>18353254
You should, because modern science has drastically changed how we view Plato. The metaphysical is now the psychological and neurophysiological.

>>18353890
Psychology and neurology do no better than Plato's metaphysics. In fact psychology is largely irrelevant outside of subjective matters, and neurology is a joke (outputs=/=inputs).

>>18353877
Do you deny we can use our senses to gain knowledge about the world?

>>18353939
No. But I deny that our senses are accurate for objective measurement.

>>18353919
There is no "metaphysics." It's signals within our complex nervous system. We are bound to the earth, and your crusade against it has lost.

>>18353964
It's signals within our complex nervous system
Even science cant prove this, and every attempt they make it shows the opposite.

2k years later, still unfalsifiable

>>18353964
>>18353981
I'll just leave this here,
https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005268

>>18353981
>Even science cant prove this
He says, after having read no published papers whatsoever.

>>18353983
>be unfalsifiable
This is the trick to never losing.

>>18353996
See >>18353984

>>18353964
>There is no "metaphysics."
entirely dependent on how you define it

>>18343626
>There are truths we know without learning.

Such as?

>>18354022
You are retarded.

>>18354043
It is clearly you who is retarded.

>>18354059
>still believes that dreams are a separate world distinct from the physical
>not a complete and utter retard

>>18353964
>>18353981
Meanwhile according to this survey:
https://philpapers.org/surveys/
A small majority of philosophers are Platonists regarding abstract objects, and if you change to philosophers of Math then it's a bigger majority. So if you fucking love science and don't want to end up being like a facebook antivaxxer conspiratard, you better listen to the experts.

>>18354070
>phil students
>philosophers
lol

>>18342331
>actually reading anything pre-rationalism other than overviews
Lmao

>>18354067
Same universe, different reality. Deal with it.

>>18354076
oh sorry, lets listen to a Nobel winning scientist instead:
>>18346832
I fucking love science bros

>>18354097
>shit now what, better play the semantics game I suppose

>>18354070
Analytic platonism has nothing to do with Plato's philosophy, these are just people who accept the existence of abstract objects. Even worse, in most cases they do so while denying the existence of universals (as in, there is no idea of 1, rather there are many abstract 1s in the same way that there are many concrete rocks).
Regardless, I think you don't need to appeal to any consensus in order to discard that other anon's terrible objection, namely the one for which neuroscience refuted metaphysical theories such as the one of anamnesis (which, frankly, as an objection it does not make not even one step forward compared to the critiques of the ancient atomists - this isn't anything new)

>>18354109
Cope. Psychology and neuroscience have absolutely zero worth metaphysically.

>>18354127
>Cope.
You lost the privilege to say this when you pulled the semantics card.

>>18342331
cringe
>>18342335
fpbp

>>18354120
>these are just people who accept the existence of abstract objects.
The existence of abstract objects would be enough to disprove someone saying it's just
>signals within our complex nervous system.
Now we can't prove abstract objects exist, but he is arguing as if it's modern consensus among scientists that they don't, so an appeal to consensus is fine here.

>>18354557
Abstract "objects" do not exist. Abstractions do exist, in the brain.

>>18342331
not really because you aren't supposed to take his ideas on the forms at a literal face value, regardless if he did or not
the last part is pretty true and did made me kek though

>>18351524
Only because the Christian church was influenced by the Greeks and reused Platos arguments for their own use

>>18345921
Only homosexuals can truly understand Phaedrus.

>>18342331
worst meme i've ever seen

>>18342598
It's called reasoning by way of analogy

>>18355444
It's called reasoning by way of false analogy

>>18355444
Plato is infamous for being uncharitable and straw manning his opponents.

>>18342331

So in practice, indistinguishable from what commonly meant by the word 'learning'?

>>18342331

https://www.bitchute.com/video/mhWx7Ceg4q1z/

>>18342331
I thought one of the most convincing examples was knowing the shortest path between two points.

>btfo the past 500 years of philosophy
>Gerson contends that Platonism identifies philosophy with a distinct subject matter, namely, the intelligible world and seeks to show that the Naturalist rejection of Platonism entails the elimination of a distinct subject matter for philosophy. Thus, the possibility of philosophy depends on the truth of Platonism.

There's not even Phyrronism without Platonism.

Anamnesis, if anything, should be conceived as the power to know something, like having eyes is an anamnesis for seeing but if you are locked in a room since birth you will go permanently blind, Noetic anamnesis however is a non-permanent blindness. Or another example is the brain regions for each skill, like language, it is larger in humans, without it we cannot speak, this is another physical analogue to anamnesis for all language.

>>18342425
The Forms has nothing to do with particular knowledge, it's not knowledge of details like the locality of a denial of something else, like a 'non-Greek' in Italy.
If you had read Cratylus and Theaetetus you'd understand what Plato means by Anamnesis: it's a hollowed out vessel, if you pour water in it the water attains a specific shape. Without Anamnesis knowledge would be impossible for there wouldn't be a pre-set truth of things, but an infinitely infinite equality of truths = true nihilism.

>>18356066
Forgot image. >>18342331

>>18344777
>links to some click farm website

you share a board with people who misunderstand the most simple elements of philosophy... why are we still here

>>18356568
enlighten us fuckface

>>18355007
>Abstract "objects" do not exist. Abstractions do exist, in the brain.
Where in the brain are they physically located?

>>18357231
the prefrontal cortex

Plato was a total goof

The same reason why the mythopoetics shouldn't be freely read willy nilly, you shouldn't read Plato without tutoring.
NOT A SINGLE reputable interpreter of Plato reads 'Anamnesis' the way the stereotypical retard reading of it does. Not even Nietzsche.
Anamnesis implies objectivity and that we have access (necessarily innate) to that objectivity, if anything this all it means and nothing else.

>>18357366
>>18342331
To say that Anamnesis doesn't exist is an anamnesis of objectivity that it doesn't exist. To claim ANYTHING as true implies anamnesis.

>>18357350
Could you show us the triangle abstraction in the prefrontal cortex?

>>18357507
not yet

>>18342335
Fpbp
>>18342331
Seethe harder troglodyte.

>>18357366
>>18357375
Sounds pretty stupid to be honest.

>>18354070
>philosophers
>experts

>>18357927
Who else is supposed to be qualified to answer philosophical questions? A scientist working in a completely different area of knowledge?

>>18358003
>problems in neuroscience
>philosophical questions

>>18342331
>>18342355
>>18342338
>>18342337
>>18342335
I haven't read the Republic yet. But I've heard it's about ruling your own mind, instead of ruling an idealistic republic, isn't it? I mean, he uses the idea of a republic to show how you can rule your own mind.

>>18358851
I'm referring to the ancient Greek concept of "enkrateia".

>>18358851
brainlet take: the republic is about politics, about how to create the perfect society
better take: the republic is a metaphor for the soul, as stated in the text itself
best take: the republic is a metaphor for the soul, but it's also about politics and a bunch of other shit

>>18358867
My guess (haven't read it yet, but I bought that based collection, the big book) is that it creates a parallel between the governing of societies and the governing of your own mind, i.e. the Greek concept of Enkrateia. I've recently read about it, and honestly it sounds so beautiful and logical (in a similar way to the delphic maxims) that I hope it's true.

>>18357683
Thought so, bitch

>>18359080

>>18357507
It would just be electrical signals in the nervous system. Look up papers that study lobotomized patients if you still don't get it.

I didn't know philosophers could get so much hate.
I've considered reading Plato, Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Wittgenstein. Which should I start with? And who do you recommend/not recommend?

>>18359205
start with the Greeks

>>18359224
Why?

>>18343982
>haha like one or two things this old philosopher dude says are kinda outdated according to like science and stuff the western canon is wrong im really smart
In Plato's time, you would've been a goatfucker. Humble yourself.

>>18359246
because a slave in a story I made up knew math

>>18359246
that is just what you do on /lit/, it's part of the board culture

>>18345275
You credit these spergs too highly if you think that they can be trusted to analyse what they read instead of taking everything at face value.

>lol this playdoh dude thinks theres like tables in the sky and stuff isnt that like mathemetically disproved by science looooooooool what a retard B)

>>18359246
Because everything after them is a refutation or expansion of their ideas. You wont be able to understand them properly until you have a working knowledge of the source material.

>>18359272
We are not in Plato's time

>>18359246
You start with Plato. All philosophy classes start with Plato for very, very good reason.
In fact, I wouldn't actually start with Plato - I'd go for a book called 'The First Philosophers' which has writings from and about the philosophers that influenced Socrates and Plato, its a great read and will enrichen your reading of the Platonic dialogues.
If you start elsewhere, you will become thoroughly lost and your spark for philosophy will dampen and become bitter as you think you're too stupid for it because you picked up a Nietzsche book for your first philosophical read. Start with the Greeks, don't become another /lit/ drone that just reads wiki articles and shitposts. Please.

>>18359421
Why didn't everyone who came after them simply ignore them? Why weren't any of the presocratics as highly regarded as Socrates or Plato?

>>18359651
I don't think you understand the level of complexion Plato had as compared to the pre-Socratic philosophers.
He essentially laid out a whole metaphysical, ethical and logical framework that was never before seen. The pre-Socratics were amazing, no doubt, but none really reached the philosophical depth that Plato did with his Socratic dialogues.
His metaphysics were said to have influenced early Christian thought, his ethics are still as good today as they were back then and his logical contribution is grossly understated but it is the foundation to all of his philosophy (Socratic questioning acts as the manifestation of Platonic logic)

>>18342331
It all makes sense if you're a mathematician, just look the difference between 2d and 3d in a cartesian plane, you'll see that both of them are just a representation of something bigger

>>18359679
I've send arguments that Socrates made damage to Greek civilisation. Is there any support in this claim?

>>18359747
Seen*

>plato literally said in his seventh letter that writing books creates dogma, which must always be avoided
> Nietzsche keep misunderstanding him and calling him the creator of dogma
Why? Just why? Wasn't he a fucking greek professor?

>>18358867
>the republic is about politics, about how to create the perfect society
But aristotle literally took it as a political book

>>18359747
I don't think so. You can read Plato's apology which is apparently a pretty accurate account of Socrates' trial, the damages to Greek society are brought forward.
Keep in mind the vote to put him to death death was actually quite narrow, it was nearly a 50/50 split in Greek society at the time.
These are perfect grounds for you to make your own mind up when you've read into it. I think Socrates was a wonderful figure in history and I am glad he existed.

>>18359823
It's also a political book

>>18359823
It can be taken as both. As you should know Aristotle was more keen on grounded things, there's no surprise he took on Plato's more practical thought rather than his mystical ontology.

>>18359813
Are you saying that Plato didn't create 2000 years of dogma in Western civilization?

One thing I never see mentioned in the Republic is that Plato begins in book 2 to describe the perfect city and he is perfectly satisfied by the simple one he started with. It's Glaucon demanding more luxuries that starts the whole discussion of the rest of the book about how to make the perfect city. Perhaps Plato himself thought the simple life was good enough? Perhaps Socrates did and Glaucon is acting as Plato's mouthpiece demanding more?

>>18358879
Plato believed that society was the soul writ large. As one's own soul should be governed hierarchically in order of importance by reason, spirit, and appetite so should society be ruled by hierarchical castes of philosopher-kings, warriors, and workers. Plato was essentially an organicist when it comes to society and it's individuals. Just as disorderly cells lead to an unhealthy organism, an unreasonable organism can lead to unhealthy cells through it's inharmonious actions governed by excesses of spirit and appetite.

>>18342408
People who read everything literally and need every piece of subtext explained to them should be re-educated with a bucket of water and a towel.

>>18360132
That's a really good answer, thanks man. Sounds like Plato was incredibly based. I had similar ideas to what you've mentioned in your post and felt like Plato would be relevant and it seems he is. There really does seem to be a strong similarity between your mind (soul) and society (groups of people). It's probably why we can understand society and groups of people so well and why leaders even exist. So, we can pay attention to what strong societies are doing to survive and thrive, and use that to govern ourselves in a better way. This idea of enkrateia is fascinating to me. It's philosophically and psychologically sound. You have to rule yourself by actively managing your emotions, actively growing as a person, and all that.

Thanks for the answers man I can't wait to read this shit and take notes.

>>18359897
No one in the west cared about Plato until the renaissance.

>>18360391
Come again?

>>18345908
How is that a curriculum of biology.
Scientists don't bother with philosophy.

haha what a dumb ass all of that shit is nonsensical because its notpeer reviewed!!! 70% of the universe is """""""""""""dark energy""""""""""" btw lmao xd

>>18354070
>philosophers
>anything to do with science
I'm in STEM, I talk with people in STEM seriously.
I have yet to meet someone who would defend Plato.
We study him in high school here in Spain so everyone knows at least a bit about him or can recall their thoughts on him when they studied him.
Nobody takes that shit seriously.
Philosophy has been a circle jerk in academia from quite a few years already.
It produces nothing of substance, just mindless arguing about things that cannot be proven.

>>18360673
>It produces nothing of substance, just mindless arguing about things that cannot be proven.
I hope you're a troll account but I know a lot of people do think like this. I would argue science and philosophy are closer than you think. End of the day, natural sciences are good at explaining how things happen but it can't actually get at the why, which is just as important but often ignored since it is more metaphysical and even mystical. It's still a question that is being asked and will continue to be asked. What are your thoughts on arts, something like poetry?

>>18360673
>STEM
>Defending Plato
Nobody here is surprised STEM students are ignorant with regards philosophy. It must be a surprise to you however that the majority of the top scientists throughout history have been metaphysically leaning and in favour of Plato. Does that make sense to you - you aren't speaking for everyone just because your atheist friends have a superiority complex because they think they're getting at the REAL SHIT. No, not how it actually works, nor has it ever worked like that.

>>18360692
>troll account
Back to R.eddit.
>it can't actually get at the why
Yet, thing is that philosophy can't either, so while I can appreciate it as something to learn and think about I have little respect for it in academic fields, and so do many others in STEM.
>What are your thoughts on arts, something like poetry?
The expressions of human feelings and ideas, unlike "philosophers" they don't try to be more than they are.

>>18360735
Ugh, I didn't know there was a survey showing that majority of scientist throughout history were Platonists.
Can you source me on that?
Even philosophy left Plato behind, current trends in philosophy have for years abandoned Plato.

>>18360673
>I'm in STEM
Youre in STEM? Youre in STEM?!? STEM?!? OH WOW LET ME ROLL OUT THE RED CARPET!!!
Your colleagues are 100iq chinks and curries who only know to do what they've been told to do, anything outside of their experience is entirely foreign.
Do you think I fucking care about the opinions of literal keyboard monkeys? No, fuck off.

>>18360771
Seethe and dilate.
Btw I, luckily, don't live in an Anglo mutt country like you.

>>18360753
Your purely academic outlook on this whole situation is telling of your superiority complex, again.
You are missing out big time, you're obviously talented enough at this STEM business but you will end up like the other 99% of people as you float through life with your eyes closed. Philosophy isn't as relevant academically at all these days, that's not up for debate and I don't think anybody's surprised at that. Your ignorance is blinding you, however and you are wasting yourself by not combining philosophy and the natural sciences in your mind as one mutual venture to the truth.

>>18359897
>Are you saying that Plato didn't create 2000 years of dogma in Western civilization?
his fanboys did, not him. he explicitly wrote in dialogues to make his disciples thing. sadly he failed. that's why Nietzsche is unhonest at best, otherwise he really didn't get plato

>>18360808
>he explicitly wrote in dialogues to make his disciples thing
What?

>>18360673
>I'm in STEM, I talk with people in STEM seriously.
>I have yet to meet someone who would defend Plato.
>>18346832
Roger Penrose says nothing about Plato specifically, but he defends that math is discovered, not invented, and has a Nobel in physics.

>>18360798
I have actually read philosophy books.
I formed my opinion on philosophy following recommendations of people I met who studied philosophy.
My point is academic philosophy is a circle jerk and non-academic philosophy is worth as something that is generally good to have an opinion on.
What I reject is philosophy midwits who think they figured out reality.

>>18360813
Everyone agrees math is discovered.
You invent numbers, then discover things on these numbers.
Math is defined with a set of axioms, then based on these axioms mathematicians formulate theorems.
That's in no way a defense of Plato.

>>18360808
>his fanboys did, not him
Yeah, nah. Plato clearly wanted to change the tide of civilization in his favor.

>>18360819
>What I reject is philosophy midwits who think they figured out reality.
So would most people generally interested in philosophy.
Your bias is showing through your posts and you can't hide it as much as you stroke your chin.
I wouldn't consider a philosopher someone who's "figured out reality" at all, rather somebody who is expressing what we're experiencing in an intelligent, sometimes complex and challenging way. Not too dissimilar to the poets or the musicians or an author.
My point is, STEM is not above this. This is not above STEM. You're just as close to the "truth" as the person you're criticising. You will feel superior around your buck-teeth friends while you code a porn site, but you aren't really getting at anything, either. Don't kid yourself.

>>18360842
I might have a bias based on the retards on this website and those who I've met irl.
Anyway, science improves my material conditions, even if it's based on a set of unprovable assumptions.
Philosophy in academia wastes tax payers money.

>>18360836
>Plato clearly wanted to change the tide of civilization in his favor
as it should be

>>18360851
I will leave you off with a final note. Your disregard to history is also telling, you are not unlike the majority of "atheists" that are currently running amuck.
As much as you might not care for philosophy or actually care for its importance, it is literally the foundation on which you are building your career and "improving" your "material conditions". Plato opened the doors of the first university in which philosophy was studied, which was pretty much a proto version of STEM.
This is all subjective of course, but I do think history is important and if people want to study philosophy academically, I think that's a noble choice. The same way I would think that studying in STEM is a noble choice, for different reasons of course but you can see what I mean.
You talk about money a lot in this reply, too. Your attachment to the corporeal is holding you back, I'll say that again. Let go and actually feel for once.

>>18360789
Even worse. Anyone who says "I'm in stem" should be ignored as they most likely work in a call center.

>>18360885
Based

>>18360885
>I will leave you off with a final note. Your disregard to history is also telling, you are not unlike the majority of "atheists" that are currently running amuck.
These atheists are religious, unlike me.
>As much as you might not care for philosophy or actually care for its importance, it is literally the foundation on which you are building your career and "improving" your "material conditions".
I understand the history of science, but it's only the historical foundation, all the philosophy Aristotle did (to refer to a more material minded philosopher of ancient times) doesn't matter for current science even if it dates back to that.
>Plato opened the doors of the first university in which philosophy was studied, which was pretty much a proto version of STEM.
>This is all subjective of course, but I do think history is important and if people want to study philosophy academically, I think that's a noble choice.
They could without wasting tax payers money also.
I'm not against philosophy, I'm against midwits in academical philosophy and it hurting my egoistical interests.
>The same way I would think that studying in STEM is a noble choice, for different reasons of course but you can see what I mean.
>You talk about money a lot in this reply, too. Your attachment to the corporeal is holding you back, I'll say that again. Let go and actually feel for once.
I believe in materialism so improving my material conditions means improving my condition in general.
Science gave me Internet which gave me access to knowledge I wouldn't have otherwise.
>>18360887
Midwit.

>>18360630
nobody said this

>>18360692
>natural sciences are good at explaining how things happen but it can't actually get at the why
Thankfully Plato's metaphysis provided the solution to the why...

>>18360919
>bugman materialist stemlord calling anyone else a midwit
Guarantee you work in support and your job could be done by a braindead Pakistani

>>18360919
>improving my material conditions means improving my condition in general
Nope, actually not true and you know that. Not fooling me, my bullshit detector is good today.

>>18342605
Hugh of Saint Victor
Avicenna
Maimonides
Avicebron
St. Bonaventure
St. Albertus Magnus
St. Anselm
Peter Lombard
Henry of Ghent
Roger Bacon
Ramon Llull
Thierry of Chartres
John of Ruusbroec
Meister Eckhart
Johannes Tauler
Henry Suso
St. Thomas Aquinas
Duns Scotus
St. Bernard of Clairvaux
St. Hildegard von Bingen

Last two were more mystics than philosophers

>>18360979
>>18361019
Midwit is a compliment to you.

Has there been any paradigm shifts in metaphysics/philosophy recently, or whatever you would call big developments?

>>18361082
Those who ignore philosophy are literal animals. You are less than human.

>>18361160
But I don't ignore philosophy.
You are just coping, you have to accept that the rambling of some Greek guy ages ago is just not the best understanding of the world to many people out there.

>>18361203
Yes, many people today are soulless automatons whose only purpose in life is the fleeting feeling of desire and the hoarding of experiences.
Like I said, literal animals.

>>18361237
Not him, but you're not above being an animal just because you've convinced yourself of an antiquated philosophy.

>>18361237
Why do you insult animals?
All mammals and birds have souls except for some groups of human beings like blacks and Jews.

>>18361237
You are pathetic.

>>18361256
A bird shat on me yesterday and was laughing as he flew away.

>>18361237
NOT coping, btw

>>18359173
So you say there is an identity between an "electrical signal" and an abstract concept. Could you pass the papers that affirm that?

>>18361397
Also, explain how did Plato know about abstract concepts without knowing electricity

>>18361397
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4014104/

>>18361417
He had a working prefrontal lobe.

>>18361417
Was this supposed to be clever?

>>18361059
Descartes dwarfs them all intellectually.

>>18361500
wow there is a particular cerebral response in particular cerebral activities, plato refuted!
i swear you people must have no souls

>>18361874
>plato refuted!
Not looking to refute Plato in general, just the view that abstractions aren't neural.

>>18361921
you think you mean are*. and again, what you are pointing out is that cerebral activities correspond to cerebral responses. otherwise you explain to me how we could think without brains.

>>18361994
>otherwise you explain to me how we could think without brains.
That would be my request to you. It's the p-zombies who think they are interacting with abstract / metaphysical "objects" independent of the brain that I take issue with. Metaphysics is primitive psychology and neuroscience, the latter two replacing the former; the Forms are neuropsychological constructs.

>>18362013
another case of confusion between natural order and rational order. anyhow you tell me how it is possible to think without a body or to be a human being without a body. object is anything referred to a subject, so yes there are non physical objects, read your husserl. in any case you just sound desperate to disprove whatever you have no clue of. clearly.

>>18362075
>rational order
A psychological conditioning within the human nervous system. Nothing "metaphysical" about it.

>you tell me how it is possible to think without a body or to be a human being without a body.
Why would I do that?

>object is anything referred to a subject, so yes there are non physical objects, read your husserl.
I am not talking about this.

>>18362082
you don't seem to understand what you are talking about. what you think you mean when you refer to psychological condition? reason is not an individual, particular condition but it is constitutive of human beings. and you miss the point of the difference between natural and rational orders, as expected.

>>18362100
>what you think you mean when you refer to psychological condition?
A particular configuration of neurons.

>reason is not an individual, particular condition but it is constitutive of human beings.
We are a species, i.e., we share most of our DNA, i.e., we share most of our neurological structure.

>you miss the point of the difference between natural and rational orders
I didn't. I'm just not interested. What I'm interested in is recontextualizing (philosophizing) the "rational order" to work with a modern scientific understanding.

>>18358851
It's more than that. It's an attempt to explain morality. Why be good? Why not just do everything that's in your self-interest?

>>18362116
this is not psychology.

>modern scientific understanding
i have bad news. this is out of your scope. i think it is pretty clear this is the case though.

>>18362125
It is psychology, which is neural. Collective consciousness means nothing more than a commonality in our neurological structure. Metaphysics is neural, qualia is neural. There is nothing about this topic that isn't neural.

>>18362132
you said neural configuration, psychology does not take the structure into account. the structure does not implicate in the quality. you like to confuse things.
anyhow i wonder why you people come to threads like this one, you can't even notice when plato is using a metaphor or not, you can't barely read a text. go do something else, all of this is obviously out of your depth.

>>18358879
The parallel does exist but when Plato gets into the Allegories around Books VI and VII, he starts to discuss morality, truth, and justice outside the governing of society. See the Allegory of the Cave. The reality of the world is not necessarily what society says it is. Remember who killed Socrates.

>>18362143
Dude, psychology and neuroscience overlap, the only difference being their focus of study. Psychology is neural; psychological processes are driven neurally. If you think this is confusing anything, you don't understand psychology as a science, or what neuropsychology is.

>you can't even notice when plato is using a metaphor or not
A metaphor for what? I'm not refuting the Forms, I'm just recontextualizing them as neuropsychological constructs. It's neuroscientists and psychologists who are studying the Forms today, not metaphysicians.

>>18362165
i know they are related but their scopes differ. mind/thought patterns with external behaviors are not the same as the physical structure of brain.

in any case you miss what the forms are since you can't understand how your saying ''neurological structure'' is what Form conveys.

>>18362186
>mind/thought patterns with external behaviors are not the same as the physical structure of brain.
No, but they are related. An individual's psychology stems from and is embedded in that individual's neurological structure. Configurations of neurons produce psychological conditions and abstractions. Collective consciousness stems from any commonality in structure / configuration. The point is that we are not dealing with anything beyond, above, or outside the body when we talk about things like consciousness or qualia or Forms or metaphysics. There is certainly a need for specialized fields of study but today they are psychology and neuroscience rather than metaphysics.

>you can't understand how your saying ''neurological structure'' is what Form conveys
And you cased you don't know what the word recontextualizing means, it means changing how we view something and its relations and implications. "Form" does not convey anything outside the body now that we have understood the body much better. If you argue otherwise then you have understood absolutely NOTHING that I have written here and nothing about modern science.

>>18362212
you see the mark of a paradigm but you miss the paradigm completely. again, go somehwere else because you have no idea what plato, metaphysics, forms, any of these, are about.

>>18362221
I know what they are about. That is why I hold a genealogical view of them that sees the role they played then and the role they play now. Do you want to actually address my post or just turn your nose up at me like a pretentious pseud?

>>18362231
they don't play anything now that they didn't back then. are you able of understanding some simple allegory as the cave one?
>actually adress my post
address what? your own repetitive claims failing to understand the very issue you affirm to understand? i don't think any more detailed and profound explanation is worth it.

>>18362241
>they don't play anything now that they didn't back then
Then you understood absolutely nothing I wrote here, p-zombie. I'm off to bed.

>>18362246
and that is why i'm telling you for hours how you don't know what the forms are. literally just read plato, retard.

>>18360391
Aquinas was more Platonic than he was Aristotelian, Aristotle himself is a Platonist.

>>18360673

>>18360004
>>18360004
>Perhaps Plato himself thought the simple life was good enough?
Yes, that's how his Republic ends.

>>18360673
I study social science (which you guys hate ofc), and the more I study philosophy, the better I understand people, as well as people in relation toother people and material objects.

>>18361500
Maybe you didn't understand what I asked or, more likely, you didn't understand the paper. I asked you for a paper that showed identity between "electrical signals" and abstract concepts. You shared a paper that shows correlation. Do I need to clarify that correlation and identity are not the same?

>>18361525
No, you were supposed to be clever. Would you answer please?

>>18362241
True. OP has no point. Just juvenile arrogance and ignorance about the most elemental distinction between philosophy and science.
With enough patience, we could make him say that epistemology is just a neural signal in his prefrontal brain. He can't understand how this is so much more dogmatic and metaphysical (and stupid) than Plato