/lit/ - Literature

The Bible

>>21268954
You'd rather be seen as being right over being right?

>>21269050
Can someone be right and also not be seen as right?

>>21269054
Absolutely. Have you ever tried being sincere around here?

>>21269060

>>21269060
Go ahead then, say something beautiful and true.

Let us see how right you seem.

>>21269018
fucking lawl

>>21269069
Easy.

“The self is a relation which relates itself to its own self, or it is that in the relation that the relation relates itself to its own self; the self is not the relation but that the relation relates itself to its own self.”

Objectively true statement. Objectively beautiful. Reviled by many!

>>21269121
How does this account for the soulless?

>>21269126
We do not associate with the soulless.

>>21269139
You should, it would help point out the flaws in your "truth"

You can retort with "this doesn't apply to them" if you wish, but all you have done is made your "truth" ad hoc.

>>21269121
>The self is a relation

>>21268954
Nietzsche. I don't even mean that negatively. The ancient Sophists were foreshadowing Nietzsche, who did what they did but better. Like Thrasymachus is kind of a shitty sophist, but Nietzsche's ideas correct what he does wrong. Protagoras and Gorgias have the kind of relativism that Nietzsche also defends, again in a more systemic way than we have left from them. Just be careful NOT to get the wrong ideas about Nietzsche. Read him carefully.

>>21269154
What do you consider a wrong idea bout Nietzsche?

>>21269154
In my opinion the only people who should read Nietzsche are artists and/or total softy nerds. In the hands of a politician or the less naturally empathetic his words become poison.
Nietzsche was a poet, and if you are not adept at feeling meaning conveyed through poetry which transforms the very literal meaning of the words themselves, you will only have half his philosophy. You will hear his brain, not his soft and poetic heart - and his mind was dark and dangerous in the most beautiful of ways.

>>21269178
I do think it becomes poison in their hands but it's because they don't notice what he's actually saying. It's usually that they don't even read him fully.
>>21269167
For starters if there's one thing Nietzsche opposes, it's ressentiment. That's when you let your hate and spite for your enemy fester and rot until it and you become toxically obsessed with your enemy and ways to get back at them and hate them. It's why Nietzsche disliked anti-semitism. So when white nationalists think they're Nietzschean because Nietzsche speaks of will to power positively, they don't get him right. They're doing what Nietzsche opposed. His idea of will to power is really just the idea of creative expansion and flourishing, and less about cooking up intricate ways to get back at your enemies, if that makes sense.

>>21268954
Serious answer OP: the Art of Controversy by Schopenhauer

>>21268954
read Plato and Aristotle. The former will show you how to set a deceptive context and use hand-puppets to ensure your point wins the day, and the latter will teach you about seething and misrepresenting superior thinkers so you can pretend to refute them.

>>21268954
Sophist just means "wiseman" in the classical sense, it's only taken on a negative context that all western philosophy is based on Socrates (Plato).

In the classical sense, everyone wishes to be Sophist.

>>21269201
>It's usually that they don't even read him fully.
Likely the case. It saddens me that so few can see his beauty, but it is ultimately rather fitting and poetic.
I love this mustachioed madman like you wouldn't believe.

>>21269018
No

>>21269361
Yes

>>21269145
They didn't have the word "emergent property," in his say. Same thing.

>>21269141
>You should, it would help point out the flaws in your "truth
Like you expertly did by being a snarky little woose?

>>21269121
Fichte?

>>21268954
Just read Hegel

>>21269650
Kierkegaard. Sickness Unto Death. Its like the second paragraph on the first page.

Fantastic book. Really helped me discern why my personal philosophy didn't make me happy.

>>21268954
Read Aristotle's Categories and do the opposite

>>21269698
Right, that's why it felt familiar. I've read the opening bits of Sickness Unto Death, doesn't he say we're finite+infinite and temporal+eternal there too?

>>21269771
Yeah thats all in the opening where, I think, he was trying to quickly get through his position on the human person; wanting to get right to his ideas about Despair.

>>21269771
Same anon above. Thats why the beginning of SUD sets a poor tone for the whole book. He crams complicated ideas in a handful of pages. It's hasty, but I understand why. I've no who his audience was and I guess that had an impact.

>>21268954
Athenian oratory, Roman oratory (Cicero etc.), philosophy of rhetoric (Aristotle's Rhetoric, Quintilian's Institutes of Oratory etc.).
>The Oratory of Classical Greece series
https://www.degruyter.com/serial/utxocg-b/html

Not sure what the standard secondary lit choice for rhetoric today is, but others may have recs.

>>21268954
Think about what the perversion of Justice and Diplomacy have done to the nations of the world of the last 2500 years. Consider how much misery has been wrought in the name of a honey-tongued, but fetid-hearted ruler or politician; and what of bought lawyers? Bought judges? Common swindlers? False clergymen? These are all sophists at their core, and certainly those who take on power of argument and public enterprise to forward their schemes. Can any human being truly imagine just how much damage they have done? None, lad. Not a one.

Preserve purity of heart. It is your most precious object. Sophists have nothing. They've sold their sapphires for sundries.

>>21269018
>t. sophist

>>21269698
An absolute masterpiece. Kierkegaard ontologically demolishes the whole of all atheism with the mere introductory argument. Meanwhile, all of modern philosophy - casually unaware.

>>21269940
That series is based, BUT I was disappointed by their handling of demosthenes because they actually leave out a few of his speeches. But all they others are GOAT.

reality - peter kingsley

It involves Gorgias near the end of the book to show how he followed on from Parmenides and Empedocles.

>>21268954
Nearly any modern intellectuals whatsoever.

>>21273054
Even your preferred modern intellectuals?

>>21273126
Yes.

>>21271439
the sophistry of a politician is a weapon he would be a fool to disarm himself of, unfortunately.

>>21268954
Sophist by Plato

>>21268954
Didn't Dilbertman have a list of persuasion books? Does anyone have a copy?

>>21273876
Ok so are any of these any good?

>>21269121
Good post.

>>21269145
Good job using a children's show to illustrate just how fully out of touch you are with scientific and philosophical thought.

Whether from a Christian viewpoint, or a scientific one, the self would be a relation. "Do not sit in the seat of a scoffer, he will not go to the wise."

>>21269121
You left out the best part. Kierkegaard's closing ontological induction which annihilates the whole of modern evolutionary cosmology and athiest existentialist philosophy, and brings his reflection on the self to a close.

>In the relation between two, the relation is the third term as a negative unity, and the two
relate themselves to the relation, and in the relation to the relation; such a relation is that between soul and body, when man is regarded as soul. If on the contrary the relation relates itself to its own self, the relation is then the positive third term, and this is the self. Such a relation which relates itself to its ownself (that is to say, a self) must either have constituted itself or have been constituted by another.
If this relation which relates itself to its ownself is constituted by another, the relation
doubtless is the third term, but this relation
(the third term) is in turn a relation relating itself to that which constituted the whole relation.

>>21269121
You left out the best part. Kierkegaard's closing ontological induction which annihilates the whole of modern evolutionary cosmology and athiest existentialist philosophy, and brings his reflection on the self to a close.

>In the relation between two, the relation is the third term as a negative unity, and the two relate themselves to the relation, and in the relation to the relation; such a relation is that between soul and body, when man is regarded as soul. If on the contrary the relation relates itself to its own self, the relation is then the positive third term, and this is the self. Such a relation which relates itself to its ownself (that is to say, a self) must either have constituted itself or have been constituted by another.
If this relation which relates itself to its ownself is constituted by another, the relation
doubtless is the third term, but this relation
(the third term) is in turn a relation relating itself to that which constituted the whole relation.

>>21269018
Why don't you give OP a real answer.

>>21274392
2 are dilberman's own books, some are literally /lit/ meme books

>>21277376
Yes yes obviously. Are there any good ones?

>>21268954
Xenophon, Thucydides, Diogenes Laertius (not a sophist, but will help condition you for it), Nietzsche