/lit/ - Literature

>>19359280
Anon, this sounds less like you studied the Ancient Greek philosophers and more like you skim read a few Wikipedia articles on them.

>>19359293
>skim read a few Wikipedia articles on them.
Not defending OP's faggotry, but you realize that's literally pretty much all we can do with the pre-Socratics, right? Lmao.

>>19359280
>Do NOT make the mistake I made of studying modern philosophy first and then going back to study the Greeks
This, or you'll get filtered like OP.

>>19359280
Filtered lol

>>19359320
>>19359323
What does filtered mean

>>19359280
you are supposed to read Plato and Aristotle, which you probably didn't do, judging off your School of Life tier understanding of Plato. Also Heraclitus and Parmenides are not about "muh motion and muh stillness".

>>19359348
doubly filtered

>>19359303
Not true. You can read Nietzsche's early work on the Pre-Socratics (though he doesn't cover all of them) and The Art and Thought of Heraclitus for a much better understanding than what Wikipedia can give you. For example, Nietzsche explains that "all is water" for Thales really meant "all is one" and that his use of language marked the beginning of philosophy as a separate form of inquiry about life from religion.

>>19359348
Triply filtered.

>>19359425
>Nietzsche's early work on the Pre-Socratics
What's the name of the book?

>>19359280
>>dude everything has an ideal form that conveniently corresponds to its phenomenological appearance (totally not the other way around)
Damn, how did you study modern philosophy and never engage with anyone talking about the problem of universals?

>>19359543
i think its some essay or maybe a few

not him

>>19359543
Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks

>>19359348
Quadruply filtered

How do i really get philosophy when reading books?
Never tackled such literature before, and can do, but think i'm not doing it the best way i could.

>>19359280
>actually everything is in motion
remains unrefuted

>>19359636
possibly unrefutable.

>>19359636
>he thinks numbers are moving
Refuted.

>>19359597
thanks

>>19359280
Obviously older things are less scientifically informed. That isnt why people tell you to read the greeks.

>>19359696
>he thinks there are more numbers than one
One is the only number and is constantly moving creating other numbers. Check set theory for confirmation if you are mathematically inclined.

>>19359280
They were the first thinkers to eschew dogma and to start independent inquiry in Europe.

>>19359348
quintuply filtered

>>19359696
Number and discontinuous quantity are pure quantity, which has no proper existence.

>>19359348
go back

>>19359280
What a pathetic take. Think for a minute before showing your embarrassing thoughts to the world.

>>19359696
>>he thinks numbers are moving
They are.

>>19359696
numbers aren't real, kid

>>19359348

>>19359935
They are. Numbers are moving through time.

>>19359952
time isn't real either

>>19359972
Depends on how you define it. It is the unit to measure change in space.

anyone else find this kind of discussion completely pointless and boring? I'm interested in inspecting cosmology and social relations and history but this shit like EVERYTHING IS IN MOTION, no actually everything is the number 1 teehee, this is just autism. Literally arguments that have been going in circles for actual millennia. Tbh i think guenon was right.

>>19359990
the real deal is not looking at the proofs too closely

>>19359280
I mean, you can make the modern philosophers sound retarded too
>I think, therefore I think I am, I think
>causality is just a bad habit bro
>real eyes realize real lies, but they cannot see things-in-themselves
>duuude, you are God experiencing its own unfolding, how absolute is that?
>life sucks, and I can't get pussy
>life is pretty good, and I can fuck prostitutes. nooo not the fucking horse!

>>19359280
>water
meant fluid
>fire
meant soul
>change is impossible
>actually everything is in motion
both
>everything has an ideal form
this

>>19359280
You are talking about giants that stood at the very dawn of the history of thought. Had you lived in their times, you would have been utterly inconsequential, incapable of formulating any interesting idea, of coherently organizing a worldview on your own with minimal help, that is to say, exactly as you are now.

god I love it when americans get squashed like the cockroaches they are by the galaxy brains of antiquity. eat shit you fucking cunt

>>19360237
fucking based, this

>>19359280
>>dude everything has an ideal form that conveniently corresponds to its phenomenological appearance (totally not the other way around)
whoa epic bro, nominalism?? really fucking shattering the contemporary episteme there retard

>>19360063
do faggot americans really just sit around and reduce shit they don't understand to keg party babble? god I want to pop your eyes like fucking grapes

>>19359348
It's shorthand for saying that you don't understand the text. If the book is a filter, you've been left behind.

>>19360256
>>19360274
>everyone I don't like is American

If in doubt, after you’ve aligned with dictatorial aristocrats who smash cocks in public, commit suicide by committee by demanding the public pay you to work out when you’re squatty fatty gnome man.

>>19360237

You are talking about idiots that believed in sky fairies and thought the planets ruled their lives and brought those biases into their inquiry with nascent rationality colored by feelings, and created their story based on paradoxes and circular fundamentals...

... no wait, that is now too!

>>19360284
at least the other anons are jsut mocking this retard, you are striaght up jsut trying to confuse him.
Fuck off.

>>19360274
I'm not american and I was actually pointing out the silliness of op's oversimplification as you can read in the post.

>>19359303
What are you talking about? The Diels-Kranz edition of Pre-Socratic works is like 1300 pages long, we have a lot to read about the Pre-Socratics, accounting for both fragments and testimonials. Also entire books have been written on the topic, and it is now pretty clear that people like Heraclitus were not grugg-level retards saying "duuuh everything is fire"

>>19360344
Indeed you were. I apologize. Not being sarcastic.

>>19360379
>it is now pretty clear that people like Heraclitus were not grugg-level retards saying "duuuh everything is fire"
Shame. I was gonna read the 1300 pages, but now that I know its not based I won't

>>19360063
>actually quoted Descartes wrong

>>19360542
Anon, I'm sorry to tell this but none of them are real quotes.

>>19360739
yes but his imitation of them is imitating the wrong quote too

>>19359348
Excellent bait post, I kneel

>>19359293
I am formally trained in philosophy and OP is right.

>>19359280
greek philosophy is unironically a joke outside of historical interests. many of their ideas can be traced all the way to modern philosophy but pseuds think this means that you have to "start with the greeks". you are much better off starting with the 1500s and on if you don't want to waste your time. you don't need to understand which basic ideas of these crazy people influenced modern good ideas to do philosophy.

>>19360284
Lmao, this is evil, feeding him the wrong definition so he spends his time here getting mocked for not knowing what it means.

Btw OP, when they say you got filtered, they are referring to an academic filter, specifically a philosophical filter, meaning the type of lens that you use to interpret information. Nowadays we use certain critical filters to examine the text, the anon is pointing out that you did not read the greeks through a classics lens. Because you did not 'filter' the information properly, you missed the deeper meaning behind it, because in your experience, you absorbed useless information, while missing out the important details. It's kind of like how your brain doesn't notice the feeling of your clothes, the sight of your nose, or the feeling of your tongue in your mouth, or the pace of your breath. Because the greeks were written so long ago, our our actualy biology has developed differently from theirs. So in order to properly understand the texts as they would have done, it is important to have a good knowledge of important academic filters, and to apply them properly in order to get the most out of the texts. Ironically, they say that you got 'filtered; by the text. It's used ironically to imply that because you failed to 'filter' the text, the text instead 'filtered' you.

I can tell that you are new here, and I don't have my head up my ass, so if you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

>>19359990
you are correct. philosophy is very broad and much of it is just pointless unrigorous nonsense that never asked what they hope to accomplish or what they even can accomplish.

>>19359895
Implying the universe isn't discrete in nature

>>19361265
This.
Universe is discrete.
Cantor was a charlatan.
Intuitionists are right.
Fuck modern academia.

>>19359631
take your time with any work you are approaching. don't read any primary text as a manual for understanding the ideas involved.. they take time and patience. you are not engaging directly with the material until you familiarize yourself with what is being said, how it's being said, and why it is in that way. tldr - read slowly and re-read

>>19359280
>>change is impossible
What is ridiculous about this?

>>19361494
because things change

>>19361265
>the universe is made up of discontinuous points with empty space in between
>nothing is something
Meds. now.

This thread was moved to >>>/his/12261064