/lit/ - Literature

>>19972859
I'm happy that you expanded your knowledge! What philosofer do you plan to read after reading Plato?

What's a pure idea?

>>19972859
Critical philosophy, go!

>The light dove, cleaving the air in her free flight, and fleeing its resistance, might imagine that its flight would be still easier in empty space. It was thus that Plato left the world of the senses, as setting too narrow limits to the understanding, and ventured out beyond it on the wings of the ideas, in the empty space of the pure understanding.

the quest for truth will never end anon, and each day we are getting closer to the forever unreachable eidos

Is there any real prerequiste to start reading Plato?

>>19972948
Not really. He is the beginning. Although of course you could read the pre-socratics but meh.

>>19972954
The Presocratics are in large part made understandable to us by Plato, both by direct commentary and seeing an extremely precise formulation of where philosophy was at then.

From there we can see there influence on Plato and how important they are for understanding him on a larger scale.

>>19972948
no, just read the apology then the phaedo and enjoy your mindset suddenly becoming incredibly clear and structured

>>19972942
wtf

>He doesn't know yet
Plato IS the cave, anon

>>19973071
elaborate

>>19972942

>>19972859
Congratulations.

Childhood is when you think "Start with the Greeks" is an ironic /lit/ meme.

Adulthood is when you realize it's dead serious.

>>19972859
You’re still in the cave anon, keep searching

>>19973140

>>19973088
No.

>>19973088
All metanarratives are caves. Causality itself is the greatest metanarrative. There is only correlation.

>>19973190
My meta narrative is the correct one but I wont tell you what it is

>>19973190
Impossible. Without causality we could not even have determinate consciousness of even our own existence within Time. Read the second analogy of Experience, Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant.

>>19973190
>the meta narrative about the set of all metanarratives is not a metanarrative

>>19973229
Relativistbros...

>>19973190
>Causality itself is the greatest metanarrative
why do you say this? tons of metanarratives exclude causality

Ah I remember doing Plato back in uni 22 years ago. The theory of the forms presented in The Republic and Phaedo then repudiating himself in The Parmenides with the third man argument. Parmenides, Theaetetus and the Meno are probably the best books.

>>19972874
Honestly plotinus, i really like this style of thinking

>>19973299
Shhhhhh, Plotinus is forbidden knowledge. Let those who are predestinated to find Plotinus find him on their own. Others are not worthy

>>19973299
Aristotle is the logical progression considering most of his work is objections to Plato. The Ethics and the Metaphysics are the 2 main works.

Is Plato hard to read? Where do I begin? Should I begin by watching summaries and similar on youtube?

>>19973316
When you recommend Aristotle to ppl though, you really should warn them that in comparison with the witty humorous Platonic dialogs, Aristotle is boring as hell. Good, yes, but boring as hell. Like a bitter medicine that's good for you but tastes so wretched in your mouth

>>19973318
Plato is the easiest philosopher, many of his dialogs are downright hilarious, they're very light reading and yet at the same time there's massive depths to them.

>Where do I begin?
Rather than fretting about the exact order, just read all his collected works in the order they're presented here: https://b-ok.cc/book/2074666/631f38

>>19973332
>>19973318
Plato is interesting in that he really does teach you HOW to think, not really WHAT to think. Don't focus so much on the actual particular results he derives, rather, focus on the dialectical method he uses. Even Plato himself drove this point home by purposefully leaving concepts undefined: there are several books where the speakers simply fail to satisfactorily define a term and the book just ends.